And here I was thinking Facebook was only good for organizing an insurrection, pilfering personal info for election ads, and radicalizing my friends.
Are you fucking kidding me? Far less famous people have been banned for far lesser offenses.
You can be banned for being born with the same name as a more famous user, born with a name shared with a famous puppet, or any other names they just don’t like. Or any other set of arbitrary reasons. The internet is filled with them.
Yet some dude that willfully posts messages encouraging violence, hate, and murder gets the popped monocle treatment just because he’s good for business? Give me a fucking break.
Right…getting kicked off of Facebook is a “penalty.”
They (Facebook) need to change their terms and conditions to the “From the Desk of Donald Trump blog” playbook.
Although Save America has no obligation to do so, it reserves the right, and has absolute discretion, to remove, screen or edit any User Content posted or stored on the Sites at any time and for any reason without notice, and you are solely responsible for creating backup copies of and replacing any User Content you post or store on the Sites at your sole cost and expense. Any use of the Interactive Areas or other portions of the Sites in violation of the foregoing violates these Terms of Service and may result in, among other things, termination, or suspension of your rights to use the Interactive Areas and/or the Sites.
The point is that Facebook didn’t really ban him like it does other users. It declared a bespoke indefinite suspension just for him, so they can play it by ear and (depending on your cynicism level) get the Trump Traffic back later if they want it or simply make someone else (i.e. this oversight board) responsible for the final decision. The Board told FB to get fucked and fix its shit.
I think this whole exercise has been silly. Like it or not, Facebook is a corporation. The only people it’s legally obligated to answer to are its shareholders and then the countries in which they operate. And usually in that order unless local laws flip the priority which is shockingly rare. So I hate seeing this nonsense where “oh no we’re too big so we need oversight but we’re not really having any oversight it’s just a formality” thing going on here. If you want to ban a public figure for any reason just say so, just be aware it might tick off your shareholders who often are politically active people. I won’t get into the question of the Internet Commons because that’s another level on top of this that really needs its own thread to tackle. Regardless, I’m glad at least Trump got shafted again because that clown has been coddled his entire adult life since he’s been a public figure. People need to punch this dork hard and stop worrying about his feelings or his pathetic lawyers.
Republicans claim they are for capitalism, free markets, and deregulation while at the same time calling for regulation and investigation into companies that do stuff they don’t like. Almost as if they don’t really have any set beliefs other than “fuck you, got mine”.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I poked around, news articles I found never really mention this, Wikipedia has a separate page titled “Social media use by Donald Trump” and the section on Facebook doesn’t mention posting outside the Access Hollywood apology. I finally checked Facebook and they’re still there, terrible, and popular.
I feel like “the media” has a special love affair with Twitter that isn’t there for other forms of social media, even though it’s much smaller. I was wondering if he mostly cross-posts? I see the same mix of what’s probably his posts and obviously from his campaign. I’m not really on either platform, but all I’ve ever seen shared were Twitter posts.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.