There are limits to what kinds of meetings will be allowed to be held in a town square, or a McDonald’s franchise, say, to pick some random giant company that provides a space to socialize.
Facebook and Twitter are like giant newspaper companies that, unlike paper newspapers, which can get in trouble for reprinting someone’s illegal words, are free to distribute others’ words, moderated or unmoderated. No website that you post content to has to distribute that content for you if it doesn’t want to. Twitter is not air.
That said, I don’t know what Facebook and Twitter should do, if there is such a thing as that. I think Twitter could easily justify not blocking Trump, by making the argument that they are a communication service, and they don’t want to start editorializing, but clearly that is not their stance! Facebook curates and bumps content up and down by its very nature, so Lord knows what it “should” do with itself.
We probably just shouldn’t have these giant monoliths.
I don't see the point of why Twitter or Facebook should even exist if they have this amount of power. You're setting yourself up to being witch-hunted down like in the middle-ages or being the new face of a most wanted poster all over the town square if you say or do the wrong thing.
It's only going to get worse if you keep using social media. Delete your accounts while you can.
No, because most social media platforms don't freely allow the organization of violent mobs. Twitter, Facebook, etc will ban you for doing that. Even, as it turns out, if you're the POTUS.
Why not? China doesn’t allow our social media. Why should we allow theirs? We can easily copy the best parts of the platform and let our companies take their users. Plus, social media can be used for mass political manipulation, and what justifies letting them hold that power over our population?
It’s good for our companies, it’s good for our people, and it takes away a dangerous tool from a country that is more and more an adversary.
I truly hope it is banned. Better late than never. Nothing against this rather brain-dead tech. Let Facebook/Google/Twitter have those users on the clones.
That’s too simplistic in my opinion. Social networks have publishing aspects and Facebook is responsible for what appears and gets amplified on their properties.
What happens in real life when a city gets plastered with posters containing calls for violence?
I think the more you give people reach the higher is your responsibility to moderate the content.
Agreed. This is not a "free speech" problem that is covered by the First Amendment or anything like that.
That being said, I think it is fair to raise some questions when inyalowda decide to enforce their policies in a seemly arbitrary fashion. Trump is toxic and his presence on social media did nothing to raise the intellectual bar of public discourse. But, he is far from the only world leader to share self-serving, destrucive, and misleading propaganda online. Users should demand clear policies and fair universal enforcement from FB.
I think this is a sensible and easily-enforceable solution. Facebook and Twitter are necessities today and oftentimes (for better or for much, much worse) are where history is being written. I think using these platforms as a highly important person geopolitically should dictate different rules than me, who has like 400 friends from the decade or so I've been on the platform, 90% of whom I haven't spoken to in years.
A really large use of social media is for corporate interests and "influencers" to cross promote themselves around different social media to increase their reach.
Banning Instagram and Facebook just pissed off a whole new group of people who previously didn't give any fucks about this at all.
It'll get real weird if he decides to be "consistent" and go after YouTube as well.
Well that's a load of bs if I've ever read one. I'm all for privacy but the big two social media companies Facebook and Twitter sure as shit should be forced to have options to allow folks to force only verified individuals are able to interact with them. Their promotion of criminal behaviour by allowing with such ease the impersonation of others and the unabated harassment of individuals is a load of shit.
Its immoral for either facebook or twitter to take sides - and the idea of letting them edit the news is horrifying. Facebook and twitter each are monopolies, unlike the diverse traditional press. I find it for example unacceptable that facebook's CEO has endorsed a candidate. Social media should be held accountable to act as social lubricant and nothing more in well functioning democracies.
The problem is they could pull a Facebook and show certain content to change peoples moods intentionally. It's already proven possible. That said, I'm all for legislation against all social media companies.
I'm sick of this response. These social media companies individually can reach billions of people with the ability (proven) to sway their thoughts and emotions (see Facebook, WHO, Reddit). Free speech must apply to public forums like this
Well for all practical purposes, Facebook, Instagram, Youtube, and Twitter basically control what can or can not be said at this point. This is unlikely to end well.
the narcissist in chief demands his photo be plastered everywhere. anyone against that image is mowed down.
reply