3 ms·

It's terrifying and humiliating that corporations can do such things to a President nonetheless. And not just some banana President, but one that presides over

It's terrifying and humiliating that corporations can do such things to a President nonetheless. And not just some banana President, but one that presides over an absolute superpower. USA looks more like decentralized China by doing this. No issues with Trump have been fixed, dirt has been swept under the rug. Silencing someone doesn't undo their words and, ironically, it tends to amplify their message. Impeach him, sue him, shutdown the government, rally against him persistently and systematically. That is the right way. But it takes effort, much, much, much more effort than hitting the ban button and calling it day (and achieving nothing in the process). These corps play by the FOTM. Thinking that they aligned with your just cause is crazy. Have you forgotten they cuddle with China as well?

watwut 6y ago
I would point out that president still can speak outside of twitter and facebook. It means the exact same way as all previous presidents did. > Impeach him, sue him, shutdown the government Twitter really really should not do any of those. Twitter can apply to him exact same rules non-presidential accounts are subject of. Non presidential accounts are closed either temporary or forever all the time.
- treeman79 6y ago
  He has national emergency broadcast. At this point I could see him using it just to really piss off the censors.
realmod 6y ago
Trump is indeed the President - not a king nor a dictator. His powers are limited and in this case he cannot force a private enterprise to host his private, i.e. non official, statements/comments. Trump has a multitude of other venues to use if he wants to disseminate his statements private or official.
gmm1990 6y ago
I don't know if private corporations should have to allow the president unfettered access to their platforms. I would be opposed if every newspaper was required to post whatever the president wanted. The necessity of communication to the the people should be filled with an official government website that isp's have to allow access too or something. And the president should only be able to use that when acting as the president not campaigning etc. Two issues that make this look worse are the idea that the president needs Twitter or even Facebook to communicate to people. And that the president acts solely as the president on the platform. Neither of these are really true.
- dominotw 6y ago
  > I don't know if private corporations should have to allow the president unfettered access to their platforms. Hopefully republicans can get back in power in a few years and have the will to really 'break up' big tech. I can see trump running on this again and winning. I would vote for whoever can make this happen.
ausbah 6y ago
it's a private platform, I would be more worried if they were forced to host any government figurehead
- sto_hristo 6y ago
  They will play however the FOTM power sways them. https://twitter.com/jmpalmieri/status/1347064818944118784 https://twitter.com/jmpalmieri/status/1347064818944118784

watwut 6y ago

I would point out that president still can speak outside of twitter and facebook. It means the exact same way as all previous presidents did. > Impeach him, sue him, shutdown the government Twitter really really should not do any of those. Twitter can apply to him exact same rules non-presidential accounts are subject of. Non presidential accounts are closed either temporary or forever all the time.

treeman79 6y ago
He has national emergency broadcast. At this point I could see him using it just to really piss off the censors.

realmod 6y ago

Trump is indeed the President - not a king nor a dictator. His powers are limited and in this case he cannot force a private enterprise to host his private, i.e. non official, statements/comments. Trump has a multitude of other venues to use if he wants to disseminate his statements private or official.

gmm1990 6y ago

I don't know if private corporations should have to allow the president unfettered access to their platforms. I would be opposed if every newspaper was required to post whatever the president wanted. The necessity of communication to the the people should be filled with an official government website that isp's have to allow access too or something. And the president should only be able to use that when acting as the president not campaigning etc. Two issues that make this look worse are the idea that the president needs Twitter or even Facebook to communicate to people. And that the president acts solely as the president on the platform. Neither of these are really true.

dominotw 6y ago
> I don't know if private corporations should have to allow the president unfettered access to their platforms. Hopefully republicans can get back in power in a few years and have the will to really 'break up' big tech. I can see trump running on this again and winning. I would vote for whoever can make this happen.

ausbah 6y ago

it's a private platform, I would be more worried if they were forced to host any government figurehead

sto_hristo 6y ago
They will play however the FOTM power sways them. https://twitter.com/jmpalmieri/status/1347064818944118784 https://twitter.com/jmpalmieri/status/1347064818944118784