6 ms·
Twitch disables Trump’s account indefinitely
- BitwiseFool 6y agoAt this rate, what service isn't going to deplatform Donald Trump?
- stevewodil 6y agoIt will be the same treatment as Alex Jones, he will be barred from pretty much anything mainstream
- tristanb 6y agotwitter, apparently.
- grecy 6y agoLiterally every single time I open Twitter, Trump is the first account it recommends I should follow. I'm not even in the US!!
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- echelon 6y agoParler. They'll welcome him with open arms.
- URfejk 6y agoGab.
- nomy99 6y agoPornhub? America gets gang banged by an angry mob
- huy-nguyen 6y agohttps://observer.com/2017/01/tired-of-news-head-to-pornhub-to-watch-donald-trump-fuck-the-entire-country-at-once/ https://observer.com/2017/01/tired-of-news-head-to-pornhub-t...
- throwaway201103 6y agoWas Twitch something Trump really used? Can't recall ever hearing about anything he said via Twitch.
- pgsandstrom 6y agoI think he used to stream hearthstone.
- moate 6y agoHe continues trying to play OG Face Hunter decks no matter what the meta.
- hsthrowaway999 6y agoFalse. Everyone knows Trump trades.
- catwind7 6y agothis made me chuckle
- belltaco 6y agoIt was used by his staff to stream the TV feed of his rallies.
- mattnewton 6y agoProbably preemptive, after YouTube removed a video of his and Facebook / Twitter deplatformed him entirely twitch is the next biggest somewhat-mainstream platform he could use to share that video or others.
- incrudible 6y agoI find this disingenuous. This is his latest position on the matter of succession[1]: "Even though I totally disagree with the outcome of the election, and the facts bear me out, nevertheless there will be an orderly transition on January 20th" Why does Twitter want to prevent him from making such a statement on his Twitter account? Would that not be calming the situation, if anything? [1] https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/07/trump-transition-of-power-455721 https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/07/trump-transition-of... EDIT: I misread Twitch for Twitter. Alternatively, I'm prescient and this was posted in the wrong thread.
- belltaco 6y agoHe says the facts bear out his assertion that the election was stolen... how is that calming?
- incrudible 6y agoThe part that says there's "an orderly transition of power". Trumpers will forever believe that the election was stolen, but they can believe that from the comfort of their homes, they don't need to go out and attempt to overthrow the government because of it. If any tech company were to try to suppress the "facts" that support the "rigged election" narrative, that would only reinforce the their beliefs.
- fredophile 6y agoIf somebody said "your democracatically elected government has been taken away but you should just go home," would you? Would the Trump supporters that raided the capital yesterday? The reason they will forever believe that the election was stolen is because Trump continues to say that the election was stolen.
- barbacoa 6y agoPeople spent years de-legitimatizing the 2016 election by claiming that Trump colluded with the Russian government. There were even stories published by mainstream media outlets that Russians hack election machines. The other side undermining the election results after they lost is not exactly new.
- lrossi 6y agoI wonder if he has a World of Warcraft account as well.
- Florin_Andrei 6y agoI believe that's where a lot of "viking shaman" LARPers go, am I right?
- tomatotomato37 6y agoHe seems more like a Runescape guy to me
- ASpaceCowboi 6y agoHOW DARE YOU!
- jayd16 6y agoI don't think Trade Prince Gallywix has a big role in this expansion, although I haven't played it yet.
- user982 6y agoHands up if you knew Trump had a Twitch account before this announcement. Keep them raised if you'd watched it. Anyone?
- nlitened 6y agoHandsUp
- otterley 6y agoAnd nothing of value was lost.
- you_are_naive 6y agoAm I the only one who finds the whole situation bizarre? Edit: I will be more blunt since some replies show they don't understand what I find weird: Why do you need a private social media company to stop your president from planting terrorism in your own country because he thinks the election is fake instead of congress/government/whatever??!
- stevehawk 6y agoYou mean that in 2021, the man with the "nuclear football" is banned from the 2 of the largest social media platforms? No that's not bizarre at all.
- rconti 6y agoTo be fair, all previous presidents were effectively banned from social media because they had the sense not to use it. Nothing prevented this president or any other president from just opening a 24x7 conference call line where he can just blather whatever he feels like at any time to anyone listening. But, none of them did.
- psyc 6y agoThat’s what you get when you elect a tabloid celebrity billionaire to the most important office in the world. I’ve been mostly disappointed with our selection of candidates for a long time, but I never thought I’d see that. It’s as if nobody outstanding even wants the job. Literally Idiocracy.
- giarc 6y ago>It’s as if nobody outstanding even wants the job. I think the issue in 2016 was too many people wanted the job. You can agree/disagree whether the primary field included 'outstanding' people, but the sheer number of candidates allowed the loud mouth to stand out.
- gremlinsinc 6y ago
- pupppet 6y agoJust love how these companies suddenly find a backbone days before he's out of office, just a coincidence I'm sure.
- PurpleFoxy 6y agoI think it’s more that they were all waiting for someone else to do it first. Twitter did it and now the rest will now that the heat isn’t on them.
- 29athrowaway 6y agoAgreed. Now, let's share our discontent about it on social media. That will surely make them accountable.
- flukus 6y agoYou don't think it has anything to do with his attempted insurrection?
- Threeve303 6y agoDespite the circumstances, I don’t think it sets a good precedent in the future. Many reasons for this, not least of which is when you have a criminal continuing to give evidence publicly you let them keep going...
- mattnewton 6y agoI think these platforms just don’t want any possibility that they are responsible for inciting a riot in the future. Purely an ass-covering move, just as it was to continue to platform him when he had power over the DoJ. If you want any other behavior you’d have to clarify the immunities and/or expectations around platforming government officials explicitly in law, and I am afraid what this congress would come up with.
- vkou 6y agoIt's not just ass-covering. Many of the people who work on those platforms don't want to be complicit in a coup.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- moate 6y agoLet me see if I learned my lesson from the Facebook post: Censorship is bad, nobody should be making decisions for other people, monolithic tech companies are bad. People should have rights and saying this should be a thing people can do. Hurting people is bad, unless we need to hurt them to stop them from hurting other people (or things). Neutral Discourse Provided.
- nikolay 6y agoAs much as you don't like him, he is still the president. Platforms are way too full of themselves these days! It's shameful that SV is now the biggest censor there ever was! And platforms need to learn from the past - by silencing voices, they actually create the image of a martyr, of a persecuted person giving him even more power among his followers! I have people post vulgar and offensive stuff on my Facebook wall - I never block or delete them, never attack back, etc. The stoicism of being able to tolerate people you don't like is the thru humanism and the true liberalism, not the opposite! The Commies used to pull out the tongues of people who they didn't like and who they turned into existential enemies. And let me express this type of mentality by quoting Stalin: "When there's a person, there's a problem. When there's no person, there's no problem." This is where we ended up! No civil discourse! We no longer agree to disagree! And this applies to both sides, of course! And if we look in the past, this never leads to a good ending!
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- 29athrowaway 6y agoI hope Twitch now bans antivaxxers and antimaskers. For example, this person, http://twitch.tv/anthonypatchofficial http://twitch.tv/anthonypatchofficial makes a living via Patreon donations spreading misinformation about COVID-19. He claims vaccines are made using HIV, among other nonsense. He has 100+ viewers in average. He could not make a living doing this if Patreon and Twitch deplatformed him. The only reason that guy gets up in the morning is to make the pandemic worse than it already is.
- specialist 6y agoI'd pay real money for a personal custom filter bubble which prevented me from hearing or reading anything about Trump ever again.
- rq1 6y agoI completely and fundamentally disagree with Trump and his “ideology”. But how can we agree on the principle of censorship? I mean, if we agree with the idea of censorship, we also mechanically agree to get censored tomorrow by whoever is the new censor. Shouldn’t it be the same rule for everyone?
- jaredklewis 6y agoWell Twitch “censors” (aka moderates their platform) all the time and Trump is not the first account on Twitch to be disabled, so certainly Twitch would argue that they are applying “the same rules for everyone.” More broadly, I disagree with your use of the word “censor.” Trump can say whatever he wants. But it doesn’t follow that if some company doesn’t want to publish his book or stream his video that it’s censorship. Some places don’t have moderation (parler). Other places do (Twitch). That’s fine.
- rq1 6y agoHe’s still the president of the USA. Not a random person. I’m not talking specifically about Twitch. At the moment where they make their platform public, they have no political nor moral authority to say what’s good or bad. Tomorrow if the leadership changes, they can on the contrary censor everything but not Trump and you’ll have nothing to say then.
- jaredklewis 6y ago> I’m not talking specifically about Twitch. Ok, but this article is about Twitch. > At the moment where they make their platform public, they have no political nor moral authority to say what’s good or bad. So anything that is "public" cannot have moderation? A chess forum has to allow Osama bin Laden to post his political rants? Should it be illegal to run a website with moderation? > Tomorrow if the leadership changes, they can on the contrary censor everything but not Trump and you’ll have nothing to say then. I'll say the same thing I am saying today: it's their own platform and they can moderate it however they want. If I don't like their moderation, I am perfectly capable of going elsewhere.
- chemmail 6y agoI read that as Twitter, but lets ago ahead and do that too.