US Politics Thread

[JASR]

You are doing what others are doing and conflating the issues because it is Trump.

The issue here is corporate over reach, not Trump per se.

I personally don’t have an issue with the final handling of Trump by Twitter.
He has had plenty of ‘warnings’, with the labelling of almost every tweet since the election as dubious/false.
Then he had the actual warnings - suspense of account, and then perma banned, for continuing as before.

for Facebook, I dont know what warnings they were giving him before his suspension. I would hope they were similar to twitter.

for the actions taken aParler... I have more issues with.
They seem to have had little warning about what was going to happen to them. And little time to implement a remedy (ignoring the fact, that they probably wouldn’t anyway).

there’s also Gab to now potentially be shutdown as they’ll be the next platform targeted as the extremist right look for a new pasture.

and the next

and the next

etc.

The problem of an ever polarising society, with increasingly intractable and violent leanings isn’t and can’t be solved with the flick of a switch.

I hope I wake up on the 21st to a US that isn’t at actual Civil War (on any scale).

———

As for trump, he’s not been silenced, his free speech hasn’t been taken away, he’s perfectly capable of holding a press conference , releasing statements etc just as every other president has been capable of.

the social media platforms have been crap at reducing trolling/extremism (across the spectra), ever since they gained public traction.
The ability for any one random individual to reach an audience of millions instantly and repeatedly with no checks on accuracy, legitimacy or humanity... is awesomely scarey and at the same time, awesomely powerful.

 

[Rascal]

I was going to suggest this topic probably deserves its own thread as opposed to this one.

Maybe you are right as i am getting a proper kicking in this one :))

The world is a better place when we can discuss these topics though and lots of what has been said has been very thought provoking and highly educational.

 

[Dubai Blue]

This is the grey area, I don't believe it is up to the corporation but there is no other means of recourse. Maybe Trump here is at fault by not regulating Social media but if had regulated Social media, in effect he would have been regulating himself.

I do believe though that corporate power should not be an influence on politics but it is already an influence on politics and that is where my ideological thinking falters as I have no answer to the issue. I wish i was clever enough to find a workable solution but I am not, all i see is something I perceive to be wrong and bad for democracy because i don't believe that corporate entities should wield that power.

I have been searching through Orwell for inspiration but as social media was way before his time I have struggled to find anything that backs up my thoughts.

This though from Orwells "freedom of the press" has a ring of truth in it. Orwell is right here that Twitter have not acted out of public interest but because they are frightened of public opinion turning against them and the cost/loss of profit of losing public support outweighs all else. Therefore if corporate decisions are made on that notion of cost/loss of profit, then their decision to ban Trump is purely for Corporate reasons.

Orwell writes

"The chief danger to freedom of thought and speech at this moment is not the direct interference of … any official body. If publishers and editors exert themselves to keep certain topics out of print, it is not because they are frightened of prosecution but because they are frightened of public opinion."

Appreciate the response. I understand where you're coming from. In an ideal world, Twitter wouldn't be the ones deciding these things. But in the world we've got (and under the particular circumstances presented by Trump), I don't think they were left with any other choice.

 

[kaz7]

I was going to suggest this topic probably deserves its own thread as opposed to this one.

If only , we need the trump thread back

 

[west didsblue]

Appreciate the response. I understand where you're coming from. In an ideal world, Twitter wouldn't be the ones deciding these things. But in the world we've got (and under the particular circumstances presented by Trump), I don't think they were left with any other choice.

Not sure I agree. If the owner and operator of a social media platform doesn't have control over its own service, then that would need to apply to every platform including Bluemoon. There are laws in place in most countries that set the line between free speech and hate speech / incitement. It's up to Social Media platforms to abide by those laws. In Trump's case, the fact that he wasn't banned years ago is a failure both of the Social Media company for not following its own guidelines and a failure of law enforcement for not intervening when the threshold is crossed to hate speech and incitement.

 

[west didsblue]

If only , we need the trump thread back

Fair point.

Back on topic, Trump is still a ****.

 

[kaz7]

Fair point.

Back on topic, Trump is still a ****.

Yes he is , good to see him being hit in the pocket now although i just read on sky that he will get $200,000 pension

 

[west didsblue]

Yes he is , good to see him being hit in the pocket now although i just read on sky that he will get $200,000 pension

Not if he gets impeached and convicted.

 

[kaz7]

Not if he gets impeached and convicted.

I think the republicans will wimp out again, unfortunately

 

[west didsblue]

I think the republicans will wimp out again, unfortunately

Yes, probably.