SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the twitter-and-facebook-and-twitch-and-snapchat-and... dept.
Twitter permanently suspends Trump's account:
US President Donald Trump has been permanently suspended from Twitter "due to the risk of further incitement of violence", the company says.
Twitter said the decision was made "after close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them".
Mr Trump had earlier been locked out of his account for 12 hours.
Twitter then said that it would ban Mr Trump "permanently" if he breached the platform's rules again.
Reacting to the permanent ban, Trump 2020 campaign adviser Jason Miller tweeted: "Disgusting... if you don't think they're coming for you next, you're wrong."
It comes after Mr Trump tweeted several messages on Wednesday, calling the people who stormed the US Capitol "patriots".
Hundreds of his supporters entered the Capitol building as the US Congress attempted to certify Joe Biden's victory in the presidential election. The ensuing violence led to the deaths of four civilians and a police officer.
The siege took place just hours after Trump addressed supporters and told them: "We will never give up; we will never concede."
[...] On Thursday, Facebook said it had suspended Mr Trump "indefinitely". The popular gaming platform Twitch also placed an indefinite ban on the outgoing president's channel, which he has used for rally broadcasts. So has Snapchat.
Two online Trump memorabilia stores were closed this week by e-commerce company Shopify. On Friday, Reddit banned its "donaldtrump" forum for the president's supporters.
[...] The big question now is, can Trumpism survive without the backing of mainstream media? Or will it simply slip into the shadows of the internet?
(Emphasis retained from original.)
Also at Ars Technica, CNET
Full Twitter explanation at: blog.twitter.com
(Score: 3, Insightful) by SomeGuy on Saturday January 09 2021, @03:21PM (12 children)
Yes. It IS different. It is instant, it is direct, it is raw and often unfiltered. Most importantly, people view it quite differently. Sure, previous forms of media have also been abused. But the scale and magnitude is much larger.
If I want to read news from a newspaper, that information is usually handed down through multiple levels, run through an editor who may choose to change or not publish that information. Then it is printed, distributed, i have to go out and buy one, take time reading it, and have time to think about what I read. In the past anyway, people took the time to scrutinize newspapers and papers that regularly published blatant lies or such would have been discredited.
TV and radio can be more direct, but they still have editorial control. As we have seen lately they can and will break away even from a Presidential announcement to correct what is being said.
But Twitter(R)(TM), Facebook(R)(TM) or even the Internet itself is much more direct. Filtering does not usually occur until AFTER something is posted. Because it is all still relatively new, people still view it as pure freedom of speech.
Idiots crave these little alerts lighting up their glorious toy cell phones. Reading a message that was posted DIRECTLY by the President of the United States (or someone else famous) makes them feel so special.
People need to change the way they perceive this kind of media. It needs to be taken much more seriously.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @03:26PM
I would much prefer the President be mainlining Fox News content that reading social media. That way, he will be protected from frothing rightwing paranoia.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @03:46PM (1 child)
You're obviously liberal. You should think about your stance and what you wrote. You might do a major about face if Biden tweets. And if he does, I hope your conservatives start calling him "divisive".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11 2021, @01:07AM
It's almost as though you're unable to imagine any other mode of thought than uncritical authoritarianism. So since that is the only way of thinking you can comprehend, you believe your opponent must be doing the same.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @04:07PM (4 children)
Is being "unfiltered" somehow a bad thing now? The lowly plebs don't get to read what's not approved by their nannies?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @04:11PM (3 children)
If you're a filterer, than unfitered is ipso facto bad.
If someone brings up fake news from the MSM I ask them: "Who are you, that you can demand to be informed what really happened, and do you think entertainment companies would really tell you the absolute truth?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2021, @05:47AM (2 children)
No one of any particular account. Why do you ask?
No, I don't think "entertainment companies" are really telling me the truth. I think entertainment companies are for...wait for it!...entertainment. Instead, I turn to journalists and reporters for my news and information. Yes, particularly those nasty, icky MSM sorts of news sources. And why shouldn't I demand that someone who is telling me the news inform me what really happened? What are you afraid might happen to you if you were told the truth? Why do you have so little respect for yourself that you would willingly accept a comforting lie rather than uncomfortable truths? Why do you despise yourself so much?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2021, @07:04AM (1 child)
Because if you are nobody, you'll get what the entertainment companies choose to give you.
Who are working for entertainment companies. In any case, you will get what the corporate ownership chooses to give you.
Right back at you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11 2021, @07:04AM
My! What a poor deluded little stooge you are! You may find this incredible but, unlike you apparently, I don't just accept whatever is handed to me. True, it requires that I critically evaluate the source and the content of my information but I find this extra work to be well worth the effort.
I dunno. I was hoping you would give us...something...more. This has been a disappointment.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @07:24PM
The most interesting thing here is I suspect you don't agree with yourself. Without straw manning you, you are suggesting it's a problem when people can read (or presumably hear) what the politicians they elect are saying. And as a solution you want greater corporate control over the government and politicians. In effect you have become an inadvertent lobbyist for overt corporatism.
The one thing I'd encourage you to consider is that the messaging that led you to this train of thought is coming from the very corporations who seek to supplant democracy with corporatocracy.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Saturday January 09 2021, @09:34PM (2 children)
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @11:04PM (1 child)
Which is why Runaway kept complaining that he wouldn't shut his mouth. Not that he disagreed with Trump, but that he didn't like their fascist agenda being broadcast so clearly. Hard to recruit young people when Dear Leader is spouting off their racist grandpa.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11 2021, @05:21AM
They want dog whistles, not megaphones.