3 ms·

I don't think there's really anything more to this article than can be found in the various threads here on HN in response to all the bannings. I'm a bit confu

I don't think there's really anything more to this article than can be found in the various threads here on HN in response to all the bannings. I'm a bit confused by the framing here, that Silicon Valley is punching back. There's plenty of text and quotes in the article suggesting that Silicon Valley is switching sides; they're doing it because of who is coming to power and/or because of who is losing power. That's not asserting power or punching back to my mind. That's jumping in at the end of a knockout fight and kicking the losers, trying to blend in with the winners.

xnx 6y ago
Seems likely that Twitter and Facebook would have taken this action with any president at any point if that president's words and encouragement directly led a violent mob to storm the center of US government with intent of capturing hostages and assassinating elected representatives.
- tarboreus 6y ago
  If they had done this in 2017, they would have faced stiffer and more concerted challenges from the administration. These companies don't act on principle, they're weather vanes.