3 ms·
I have come to this realization recently as well. "Deplatforming" people of significant real-world power, or largely any world leader, is notably different than
by chrononaut 6y ago
I have come to this realization recently as well. "Deplatforming" people of significant real-world power, or largely any world leader, is notably different than deplatforming an average person. A lot of comments I feel are conflating the effects of banning an average person, or an average person trying to become more well-known ("candidate Trump"), with an established world leader.
People with power have real consequences on the life of each individual. I admit I don't know how to treat those two groups but I don't think the arguments used for the average person are the same arguments that should be applied to world leaders, and vice versa.
- rconti 6y agoActually, deplatforming a world leader has less power. He could call a press conference and say whatever he wants at any time. He could order his staff to setup a 24x7 conference call and just literally pick up a phone and rant about anything he wants at any time, and have millions of people listening.
- Bud 6y agoExcept Trump can't call a press conference; not really. He hasn't been able to stand up to sustained real press questioning for years. That's why there have been essentially zero real press conferences at the White House lately.
- buitreVirtual 6y agoResponsible news networks would refuse to relay seditious talk. Would be constrained to his media bubble.
- lovecg 6y agoIt does have a moderating effect in a literal sense: it takes more than a few seconds to arrange a press conference.
- chrononaut 6y agoThat was what I meant to imply, although my comment did not come across that way. Deplatforming a world leader affects that individual less than an average user.