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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 09 2021, @11:11PM (5 children)
You (assuming NCommander and the board are okay with it, unless I underestimate your authority here) can absolutely do that should you choose to do so.
Twitter, like SoylentNews are private entities and have wide latitude to do what they want with their property, as you well know.
I take your point, but I'd also point out that SN has its own TOS with rules that can (and do) result in moderation and IP address bans. How is that so different from Twitter's TOS?
That said, should you start banning folks, I'm not 100% sure what I'd do. But the actions I would take wouldn't be based on *who* you chose to ban.
It would (unlike Twitter) be mostly a waste of time, unless you block AC posting as well. Again, as you well know.
Whether you (or I) think Twitter's actions were good or bad is irrelevant (well, unless you're a major shareholder or Jack Dorsey -- I don't hold any Twitter stock, do you?).
Personally, I don't really care because I don't use that wretched hive of scum and villany, nor do I have (and never did) any interest in what L'Orange has to say for himself.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday January 09 2021, @11:33PM (4 children)
Can != should was kind of the point. And calling out bad actors is never a waste of time.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2021, @12:55AM (3 children)
A fair point.
Whether or not Twitter should or shouldn't do anything is certainly a reasonable area for debate.
That said, what gets me riled (you're not making this argument, I just hear it from others far too often so I'm going to riff on it here as it's related) is when folks make the argument that "Twitter shouldn't be censoring! They're blocking free speech!" they ignore the obvious fact that Twitter has free speech rights too.
And if Twitter can be *forced* to publish speech they don't wish to publish, that impinges on Twitter's free speech rights.
And if their rights can be abridged, that means you or me or anyone else can have their free speech rights abridged too. And I can't and won't support that.
If the price of *my* free speech rights is that big corporations get theirs too, I'm willing to pay that price.
Don't like what Twitter allows/disallows on their site? Go somewhere else. No one is *forcing* you to use Twitter. Set up your own Mastodon instance. Use someone else's. There are lots of options.
I certainly don't use that site and it doesn't harm me in any way.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday January 10 2021, @10:13PM (2 children)
Oh, there are some arguments to be made that running a communications network of a decent size should put you in something like a Common Carrier situation. Once you reach a scope that technically allows you to be a moderator of most of the nation, you have a responsibility to not abuse that power to further your own ends.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11 2021, @01:25AM (1 child)
No, it is a choice for people to use services. Your same argument could be applied to Fox News and the rightwing lies they push. Twitter is not like phone service, there is no shortage of platforms people can use, there is no monopoly preventing people from making their own message available over the internet.
It is astounding that a supposed Libertarian is advocating the restriction of a corporation's rights. YOU tell people to fuck off from around here ALL the time, but somehow the scale of the user base somehow changes the obligations the owners have?
I'll just file this away as Teh Mighty Buzzard is a hypocrite and his ideology is not to be trusted since it depends on his personal feelings on any given issue. You are not someone to be trusted with protecting people's rights.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday January 11 2021, @03:51AM
You don't read so good. I was not addressing Twitter or Facebook specifically. I was addressing the idea that private companies should be allowed to censor however they like regardless of circumstances.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.