Topic: Trumps Facebook ban.. Should it stand?

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Is Trump a man you'd like to see farting them quotes off like a constipated beaver full of C4?

[Riquende]

I've seen calls for the Supreme Court to get involved, reversing the decision of Facebook's board.

In this one I'm afraid I'm going to have to side with the Republicans and say that the government has no right to meddle in the internal affairs of a private entity. This is America, not some socialist hellhole like Denmark.

[Red Beret]

Republicans de regulate the internet and then moan that they can't regulate the internet when the companies do shit they don't like.

They complain about cancel culture, but they're the ones looking  to expunge members who won't push the big lie. They'll probably replace Cheney with Greene.

[KillieRed]

As horrible as FB are, they’re a private company & can do what they want in free market America. Trump is a clear & present danger to their form of democracy, offensive to more people than the bizarre cult he’s inspired. They’re right to continue to ban them. I expect he’ll be back onboard in the near future though. Just in time for midterms & tasty advertising revenue.

[Billy The Kid]

I bet the people banging the freedom of speech drum wouldn't be so quick to jump to Trumps defence had one of their own family members been cracked over the head with a fire extinguisher and sent to an early grave as a result. Its very easy to champion the the stars and stripes and proclaim freedom as a god given right when it suits. It's a slightly different matter when the same stars and stripes are wrapped around your brothers coffin as its being lowered into the ground. Just ask Brian Sicknick's family.

Americans need to climb down off their high horses here and call this as it is IMO. Innocent decent Americans died on January 6th because of a riot that Donald Trump instigated. All of which was predicated on a blatant lie that was designed to push people towards violent revolt. Whats worse is the fact he has absolutely zero remorse for what he did and is actually continuing to push his lies. I would say that yes, Facebook are well within their rights to fuck him off their platform permanently

[Zlen]

Facebook account and advertising possibility is not a bloody human right.
It's a priviledge which he abused and got banned for it.

[carling]

It's been interesting to see just how much power facebook and twitter wield.  The muting of Trump has been very comprehensive.

The internet hasn't seen something with such a drop-off since the Game of Thrones finale.

[Commie Bobbie]

And yet, there hasn't been any calls (as far as I can see) to ban politicians such as Modi, Bolsonaro and Johnson amongst others from such platforms - especially when it can be argued in the two former cases - that their views on vaccinations have hampered efforts to stem the pandemic in those countries.

[Garrus]

And yet, there hasn't been any calls (as far as I can see) to ban politicians such as Modi, Bolsonaro and Johnson amongst others from such platforms - especially when it can be argued in the two former cases - that their views on vaccinations have hampered efforts to stem the pandemic in those countries.

Bolsonaro, probably. Modi's Twitter is pretty PC and he's never been anti-vax, he took his two doses on live TV.

[Riquende]

It's been interesting to see just how much power facebook and twitter wield.  The muting of Trump has been very comprehensive.

He basically just writes tweet style 'blog posts' here:

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/desk

I guess there are people linking/screenshotting them onto Twitter (not sure if that's against their TOS for someone who is banned) but without the critical mass of one central account that all these morons follow it's not all that newsworthy?

[RainbowFlick]

And yet, there hasn't been any calls (as far as I can see) to ban politicians such as Modi, Bolsonaro and Johnson amongst others from such platforms - especially when it can be argued in the two former cases - that their views on vaccinations have hampered efforts to stem the pandemic in those countries.

Trump was spouting some vile stuff and failed to stopped an insurrection (which he basically dog whistled for). He also frequently retweeted/engaged with far-right conspiracy theorist types and his engagement/reach was incredibly high.

I agree Bolsonaro and Modi are equally dangerous, but they don't seem to be as 'loose' with their usage of Twitter really.

There are so many white supremacist types on Twitter/Facebook that still get completely overlooked.

[BarryCrocker]

If Trump banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago then Facebook can kick him off their platform.

Don't forget he wasn't kicked off for telling people to drink bleach, for being anti-vaxx, for calling the election result a hoax. He was suspended within 2 hours of him praising the protesters which was considered as inciting violence.

[Chakan]

[KillieRed]

Bolsonaro, probably. Modi's Twitter is pretty PC and he's never been anti-vax, he took his two doses on live TV.

Modi: “if only you were in the top 2% you could get the vaccine too! Losers”.

[Garrus]

Modi: “if only you were in the top 2% you could get the vaccine too! Losers”.

To be fair to him, it was going decently when it was open to 45+ (at no charge). Now that they've opened it to everyone without having a cogent plan in place, it's all gone to shit although this is largely a supply issue.

[jambutty]

Banning him permanently could lead to lawsuits. 

Making it like a parole hearing, subject to review every 6 months ties his tiny hands.

First rule to get parole?  Admit your guilt.

Fat chance.

[Elmo!]

Banning him permanently could lead to lawsuits. 

Making it like a parole hearing, subject to review every 6 months ties his tiny hands.

First rule to get parole?  Admit your guilt.

Fat chance.

I don't see any valid basis for a lawsuit though. It's a private organisation that can do whatever they want.

[carling]

He basically just writes tweet style 'blog posts' here:

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/desk

I guess there are people linking/screenshotting them onto Twitter (not sure if that's against their TOS for someone who is banned) but without the critical mass of one central account that all these morons follow it's not all that newsworthy?

Which presumably gets about 0.001% of the reach he had before his bans.

[Jiminy Cricket]

I don't see any valid basis for a lawsuit though. It's a private organisation that can do whatever they want.

Yep. It would require a change in the Constitution - this would seem unlikely.

[zabadoh]

Misinformation on Twatter, et al down 73 percent since the Trump ban.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/16/misinformation-trump-twitter/

The various social media platforms should keep him off permanently just for the higher quality of discussion.

[Caligula?]

Easy.

Yes. Fuck him.

[John C]

Misinformation on Twatter, et al down 73 percent since the Trump ban.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/16/misinformation-trump-twitter/

The various social media platforms should keep him off permanently just for the higher quality of discussion.

I'm not sure which is more worrying. The fact that misinformation was so prevalent or that they'd actually be measuring it for a while and did fuck all until then.

[Red Beret]

Should the ban stand? I dunno.  Depends on its posture I suppose.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

That's totally normal,it's the rest of us who stand funny.

[TSC]

Should the ban stand? I dunno.  Depends on its posture I suppose.

Looks like he’s defying gravity by not falling on his face.