13 ms·

Salesforce says it has 'taken action' to prevent further U.S. political violence

79 points by NDizzle 6y ago

gedy 6y ago
At this point, this is all sounding like big corps trying to ingratiate themselves with the new administration, since Democrats control Congress now.
- century19 6y ago
  Seems like a valid point to me, not sure why down voted. If Republicans won those two Senate seats would companies (including Facebook, Twitter) be acting the same.
- engineer_22 6y ago
  The timing is certainly interesting.
- saberdancer 6y ago
  Sounds like a dangerous play. Next election cycle the roles could be reversed and your company might get into "monopoly breakup" group. I doubt it is that to be honest. I think they are democrat leaning, they are trying to reduce their liability but in doing so putting themselves into the story instead of being outside of it.
  - Mauricebranagh 6y ago
    Id also its sending a signal that the GOP needs to purge the hard right entryists other wise no campaign funding for senatorial, congress or presidential. Big business should have have put their foot down years ago
    - saberdancer 6y ago
      Interesting take. I disagree that big business or money should influence politics in this way and I hope we don't come to that.
      - Mauricebranagh 6y ago
        Well it might be nice if the US parties moved to OMOV (one Member One Vote) and did away with 19th century style primaries - some of the are still open out cry FFS Only Paid up "members" of a party could vote for candidates using OMOV Having UK style hard limits on campaign costs and have networks run party political broadcasts - would be nice but unachievable.
    - themaninthedark 6y ago
      Sounds like regulatory capture at it's finest.
Jonnax 6y ago
" Business software maker Salesforce.com Inc said on Monday it had “taken action” to prevent its tools from being used by the U.S. Republican National Committee in ways that could lead to further violence around the country’s presidential transition." Why are you editorialising?
- notafraudster 6y ago
  The "editorialized" title is an exact match for The Verge, so my guess is either Reuters updated their title at some point, or the OP originally submitted The Verge's coverage of the Reuters piece. I do actually feel the dangling question in the title is reasonable -- it is totally unclear who this action affects or how -- but irrespective of the title just wanted to clarify that it's probably not the OP's editorialization.
  - NDizzle 6y ago
    Thanks. I read both blurbs but I guess I mismatched the title and the link on accident. Posting from iPad is new for me.
- NDizzle 6y ago
  In what ways, specifically, have they taken action? If you find more details please request the url be updated to the source with specific information.
prepend 6y ago
Will it get to the point that this is considered “vigilante justice?” We don’t know what was done to the RNC, or why. It’s odd to release such a non-statement, but if the RNC is encouraging violence, that’s breaking laws and should be prosecuted. If they haven’t violated laws, and there’s no injunction then Salesforce is serving in the role of punisher. I get that it’s their service and they can legally serve whomever they like, but line item vetoing people and companies based on an arbitrary, changing criteria leads to mistakes and generally bad business. If I have to think about whether one day my dashboard software will turn off because one of my executives does something bad, then that’s going to make me not want to use it. This is a slippery slope argument, of course, and I should have good executives. But I don’t think I want to buy software from services that could just one day decide to stop serving me for an unclear reason.
- _jal 6y ago
  > for an unclear reason. I have no comment on the rest of your commentary, but the reason this happened is one of the few things in this story that is quite clear.
  - prepend 6y ago
    I’m clear on why trump was banned. Clear that a coup was attempted and lots of people will, hopefully, be brought to justice. I’m not clear on why the RNC would be kicked off. I’m not being facetious, why was the RNC whatevered by Salesforce?
    - matthewdgreen 6y ago
      According to this article [0], the reason given is that they were using Salesforce products to send fundraising emails that claimed the election was stolen. [0] https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2021/01/11/salesforce-says-it-has-taken-action-against-rnc-email-campaign-that-falsely-claims-election-fraud/ https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2021/01/11/salesforce-says...
      - 6y ago
atian 6y ago
You see, there are at least three states in the US.
jariel 6y ago
Why specifically is the RNC being targeted?
- woofyman 6y ago
  Because they tried to overthrow an election.
  - mcosta 6y ago
    Have they colluded with Russia again?
    - Jonnax 6y ago
      https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-cyber/senate-panel-backs-intelligence-agencies-on-russia-trump-conclusions-idUSKBN1JT2YB https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-cyber/se... "A Senate Intelligence Committee report released on Tuesday supports three U.S. intelligence agencies’ conclusion that Russia tried to help Donald Trump win the 2016 U.S. presidential election." Are you saying there wasn't collusion?
      - gadders 6y ago
        That article says Russia meddled in the election. There is nothing there to say they did it in coordination with Trump or any of his staff.
      - jariel 6y ago
        Mueller determined the Russians were interfering in the election, but there was no evidence linking Trump to those efforts. Given it was the largest such investigation of it's kind in history with hundreds of witnesses, many of them 'flipped' and singing like birds to avoid jail including Trump's own personal lawyer - it seems there was no collusion. Trump's friends were dirty with Russian money, they were caught lying - and even worse, Trump was apparently trying to obstruct justice. So it's all very bad, but there was no collusion. Many Americans believe there was collusion, which is a belief not based on evidence - you can see the massive irony here. As far as the RNC - if they were involved in the insurrection, then ban them, otherwise I don't think the should be banned as this is going to get out of hand very quickly. Many citizens and police officers died this summer of protests, even if they had more of a kind of legitimacy, they were still obviously dangerous and destructive, and many people supported the violence directly. Around the world, there is all sorts of crazy stuff going on, FB is being accused of hosting some genocidal propaganda in SE Asia, it's going to get rough, we need clear thinking and guidelines. I don't trust corporate America to be the world's arbiter of information.
jtdev 6y ago
This is cancel culture run amok. At some point these tech organizations need to provide tangible evidence of bad actors actually inciting or encouraging violence. Until we see that, these acts of cancelling are merely virtue signaling, and are becoming rather McCarthy like.
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/wait-a-sec https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/wait-a-sec
paul_f 6y ago
Cancel culture is getting worse. I don't like where this is going at all.
- Arubis 6y ago
  I am part of a generation that was raised being told: if you don’t like it, and it feels like your vote doesn’t count, well, you can vote with your wallet! And now that’s happening.
  - Grustaf 6y ago
    No it’s not. It’s not consumers abandoning Twitter because Trump is there that caused Twitter to ban him. And it’s not because people boycotted iPhones that Apple booted Parler. In most cases it’s the exact opposite. They ban people and things that are incredibly popular on their platforms.
    - baumandm 6y ago
      It's just a second order effect. Apple booted Parler to preemptively avoid the risk of consumers abandoning their platform. Apple's walled garden and strict enforcement of their App Store policies are regularly championed in other threads, demonstrating Apple's strong commitment to both privacy and user experience. Was it the right decision? Would leaving Parler on the App Store have affected their bottom line? Who knows. But you could have asked the same questions when they blocked Xbox Game Pass from the iPhone, which was certainly not politically motivated.
      - Grustaf 6y ago
        You don’t really believe that is why they did that, do you?
- king_magic 6y ago
  Insurrection culture is getting worse. I don’t like where this is going at all.
tosh 6y ago
CRM is one of the last major software categories that does not have a strong open source offering.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
warning26 6y ago
Good. It's about time that people start treating the RNC as what it has become: a radicalizing cult. Next up, can we please ban multilevel marketing "companies".
- notassigned 6y ago
  The same logic can be applied to the DNC.
  - warning26 6y ago
    Last time I checked, the DNC hasn’t tried to overthrow any elections.
jt2190 6y ago
It appears that mass emails inciting violence and sent from contact@victory.donaldtrump.com were somehow flagged by the bulk email sender, ExactTarget (a SalesForce company): > To send its emails, the Trump campaign uses infrastructure from a company called ExactTarget, an email marketing firm now owned by Salesforce, according to a Motherboard analysis of the emails. The emails are sent in conjunction with the Republican National Committee, according to the emails themselves. In response to a question about whether the company had taken action to prevent Trump from using the "contact@victory.donaldtrump.com" email infrastructure, Salesforce said it had "taken action" against the RNC to "prevent its use of our services in any way that could lead to violence." [1] This “analysis” reads to me like: • someone subscribed to a list • they received emails inciting violence • they contacted ExactTarget and asked them if they were aware/doing anything, and ExactTarget said “yes” [1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkdmdv/salesforce-takes-action-to-prevent-rnc-emails-from-inciting-violence https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkdmdv/salesforce-takes-acti...
- saberdancer 6y ago
  I'm curious, are there examples of emails inciting violence? I live in Europe, all news we get is filtered through several layers of reporters (mostly incompetent). I will admit, I am not following these news very closely but these emails could be very damning.
- saberdancer 6y ago
  I've read your link in more detail. I don't think your analysis is accurate. To be exact the part about receiving emails inciting violence. I think there were no such emails, but they asked Salesforce did they do anything about potential future emails inciting violence. Salesforce says yes. They probably either suspended the account or put in some kind of verification step where Salesforce needs to whiteflag the email to go forward. This was they can stop any potential email inciting violence, but still isn't extremely damaging to the company.
spiderfarmer 6y ago
"Taking action" can be as simple as e-mailing RNC staff that they will not send out an e-mail campaign that insinuates violent action is necessary. Completely reasonable. IBM still gets flack for their role in WW2. The GOP right now is in shambles and I would not align myself with this party at this stage.
zthrowaway 6y ago
This is kind of getting out of hand now no? I am disgusted by the Capitol incident and so happy to see Trump on his way out, but we really shouldn’t just go full throttle on banning anyone we don’t like politically now. Stuff like this is going to make the past 4 years happen again even more severely in the future. You want populism and the horrible dictators that can come with that? Keep doing this. We should be trying to unify, not purge an entire political party from our lives. One that is needed to keep power in check. Perhaps the republicans need to completely rebrand and even change their name, that’s totally fine and probably worth doing at this point. But two parties is still better than one. More than two that actually can elect someone would be even better.
- enkid 6y ago
  We don't know why salesforce did this. The RNC until now has not been denied anything from big tech that I recall. To me, this likely means someone in the RNC wanted to send out an email organizing an angry protest. Salesforce absolutely does not need to help organize an event they feel could lead to violence.
- calmlynarczyk 6y ago
  I’m a moderate and I already get lumped in as a “Nazi sympathizer” by people in my work and social circles. I know people like me are next to get targeted with this shit. Folks are content to throw around big words like “treason” and “Nazi” in these situations without any in-depth explanation. They should realize as soon as they don’t toe the narrative of the mainstream those same tactics will get used against them. You would have thought we learned this lesson from McCarthyism.
cudgy 6y ago
I’m guessing these clauses in the TOS that allow companies to immediately cancel a dependent relationship are going to be a sticking point during the sales cycle at these and many other companies going forward. Does Netflix (or other streaming services) host data on AWS? You can bet their legal departments are squirming right now at the prospect of losing their storage services due to some controversial show or documentary that they create which causes a stir with some political group in power. Completely stupid move on the part of these companies.
- Grustaf 6y ago
  Netflix are very strongly liberal though, so I don’t think there’s any such risk.
  - cudgy 6y ago
    Netflix will not necessarily be considered “liberal” forever. More importantly, the barely ruling party will not remain liberal forever. Lawyers get paid well to think about these contingencies.
- watwut 6y ago
  Afaik, Netfix is not breaking TOS of AWS. Parler broke TOS due to threats on it. Parler refused to remove those threads threatening or calling for violence. Section 230 does not cover AWS, so AWS was theoretically liable if next attack happen.
- michaelt 6y ago
  Eh, companies have knowingly accepted clauses like that for decades. Visa/Mastercard didn't get crippled when they cut off WikiLeaks a decade ago.
  - cudgy 6y ago
    What service from Wikileaks is Visa/MasterCard dependent upon? How does that apply here?
Gollapalli 6y ago
I find this particularly disturbing. Not because I think it's anything on the part of Salesforce, but that all these different corporations believe that this is something they HAVE to do. Government's don't just rule by hard power; they also rule by soft power. Soft power is social power. And the fact that companies believe that there will be negative consequences if they do not disavow the party that is now out of power, and all those that supported that party is a very dangerous situation. I think it's bad for business if that level of coercive power, hard or soft, is hanging over companies. I think it's especially bad for startups. Parler was a startup that was rapidly growing, a real startup with an actual ceo and actual investors, and AWS yanked the rug out from under them, and I doubt they'll be the last. I wonder how many promising companies that would otherwise be able to exist because we cared about their products and not their politics are likely to stop before they start, or else die early due to this environment.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- snarf21 6y ago
  Governments run on $$$$. Look at the amount that goes into lobbying and PACs. Look at Citizens United. Social power is what can cut the money. Also, maybe these companies don't want a country run by literal Nazis.
  - Gollapalli 6y ago
    What precisely was Citizens United trying to do? Can you tell me that before we continue?
    - snarf21 6y ago
      It was to let companies pretend that they are people to bypass campaign contribution limits. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citi...
boredumb 6y ago
The double standard being set in the reaction to rioting and the death of people, police officers and federal agents in this country is going to tear a rift in the USA for decades. As federal buildings were under a siege for months, David Dorn was shot, in Oakland a federal agent was shot, with the "ACAB" rhetoric emboldening people there were 7 police officers ambushed and killed across the country, etc. These are all terrible things and should be punished as equally as storming a DC federal building or killing a DC police officer. The issue is going to be the fall out of how last weeks incident was compared to the months of rioting preceding it that just happened to be for a different cause and encouraged by different politically motivated people and parties. There will be no unity when for months major media outlits and influential politicians are helping gaslight half the country that the riots and deaths were totally uncorrelated at best and quoting MLKs "A riot is the language of the unheard" when evidence became too much to simply ignore. People who are cheering on the politicization of deeming half your own countrymen terrorists because disagreements on social or fiscal policies from the actions of a few of them who feel disenfranchised whether it's taking a few hours of BLM/antifa riots and labeling all left leaning citizens terrorists or taking a stormed capital and applying it to 74.8 million other people who lean right are going destroying this country more than any riot participant could dream of. 2020 (if i'm honest it extends back a lot further than last year) should be taken as a lesson that people can feel completely disenfranchised regardless of if you believe them or if they really are at all, and that disenfranchised people can lash out in terrible ways they otherwise wouldn't find themselves capable. If payment processors, twitter, AWS, salesforce, facebook all decided that actions of the 10% of BLM protestors that turned into violent, destructive and deadly riots represented 100% and applied these same actions we would be seeing even more violence, destruction and death but with the weight of a newly renewed sense of victimization and purpose. We are all going to deeply regret the response of all of these actions throughout the next few years without being able to give them the credit they deserve. (I'd wager the aggressive banning of far left and right wing views from twitter, youtube, facebook is responsible for creating places like parler in the first place for instance, when we censor and disenfranchise people we are only going to distill those feelings and they tend to get uglier)
- watwut 6y ago
  > People who are cheering on the politicization of deeming half your own countrymen terrorists because disagreements The ones who brought bombs to capitol and RNC could be called terrorists? > payment processors, twitter, AWS, salesforce, facebook all decided that actions of the 10% of BLM protestors that turned into violent, destructive and deadly riots Both twitter and facebook were closing accounts for calling for violence or sending threats overtime at that time. Payment processors and AWS had no equivalent of Parler to remove. > we would be seeing even more violence, destruction and death but with the weight of a newly renewed sense of victimization and purpose There was some sense of victimization, but never on HN. It was only in more radical sections of twitter. Nobody including mainstream leftist people really cared enough about them.
mountainb 6y ago
This is bad for the environment of trust and good faith that the SaaS industry has relied upon for speedy growth. Since I am a registered republican (just a normal, non-political person who ticked the form at the DMV), will I be denied service in the future for something that I had nothing to do with? Will democratic party membership be mandatory to do business in the future, as similar expectations exist in many one party states? If that's the case, "Hello, Fellow Democrats, I Too Am A Democrat Who Believes All the Right Things One Is Supposed To Believe." Sure, this is just targeted to the RNC, but you cannot avoid also intimating that such measures won't be expanded in the future.
- salawat 6y ago
  This is part of why George Washington warned against the trap of National Political Parties. It never ends well. The factional tug of war inculcates itself as a supreme overarching conflict and priority rather tham having Government doing what it was meant to do. Mitigate universal problems for everybody that can't be handled at lower llevels of abstraction.
LatteLazy 6y ago
It's amazing to me how many comments here (even here) see this as a Liberal conspiracy. Even after the capitol and years of trump bring crazy and and a full ratified, court approved election.
- salawat 6y ago
  Court has nothing to do with elections, and never should. Further, if the Court's took a chance to make a positive impact by defying tradiion, slowing things down, cracking open every last detail of process, bringing the truth to the light of day, and ensuring everyone was heard and had their concerns met fully to the point where no one could reasonably hold doubt. It would have been unprecedented, and definitely controversial, but I'm certain it would have taken a lot of wind out of the sails of these things.
  - LatteLazy 6y ago
    May I ask: do you think Biden won?
    - salawat 6y ago
      I think I'm not a gambling man, and I run strictly on trust but verify. My idealistic view of the world has gotten me burnt/played way too many times. Both points are moot though, because having felt out the both sides of the aisle, I don't see a peaceful resolution moving forward without a lot of transparency, and a lot less "just trust us" out of authorities and a lot less belligerance all around. We are not in a good spot as a country at the moment. This is leagues and above the worst and most divided anyone amongst the folks I know have ever seen the country in their lives, and I've stopped doubting that Murphy will find a way.
      - LatteLazy 6y ago
        What more transpareny would you have liked in your state? What have you been refused access to?
  - 6y ago
sto_hristo 6y ago
I wanna know what action is Disney+, HBO Go, Netflix, the WWE, and WWF foundation going to take against Trump?
nunez 6y ago
What does this even mean? This is an incredibly vague article. I'm surprised Reuters published it. Are they going to revoke US RNC's Salesforce accounts? (That sounds draconian.) Are they going to revoke any Salesforce accounts associated with the Trump campaign? (That is still draconian, but justified in light of recent events.)
specialist 6y ago
Just protecting their brand. Just like Disney, Apple, Girl Scouts, etc. Smart move. Deplatforming, censorship, cancel culture, blah blah blah, is just the splash damage. Cue futile outrage and virtue signaling. Sharecroppers shocked, shocked the land lords, seed vendors, and food processors are predators, wholly and solely driven to extract wealth from the productive labor.
dzhiurgis 6y ago
Sounds like vaccine management "tool" they've released recently: https://help.salesforce.com/articleView?id=release-notes.rn_vaccine_mgt.htm&type=5&release=228 https://help.salesforce.com/articleView?id=release-notes.rn_... Note small print: Vaccine management isn’t a product or feature. Rather, it’s a mix of capabilities that an experienced admin or partner can build on the Salesforce platform. It's a pattern they've been following for a while now.
siruncledrew 6y ago
This is like the most vague paragraph Salesforce could have written. “We took action, but we won’t tell you why, or what, or how.” What’s the point of this press release then? I never knew the RNC used Salesforce prior to now anyways.

79 points by NDizzle 6y ago

gedy 6y ago

At this point, this is all sounding like big corps trying to ingratiate themselves with the new administration, since Democrats control Congress now.

century19 6y ago
Seems like a valid point to me, not sure why down voted. If Republicans won those two Senate seats would companies (including Facebook, Twitter) be acting the same.
engineer_22 6y ago
The timing is certainly interesting.
saberdancer 6y ago
Sounds like a dangerous play. Next election cycle the roles could be reversed and your company might get into "monopoly breakup" group. I doubt it is that to be honest. I think they are democrat leaning, they are trying to reduce their liability but in doing so putting themselves into the story instead of being outside of it.
- Mauricebranagh 6y ago
  Id also its sending a signal that the GOP needs to purge the hard right entryists other wise no campaign funding for senatorial, congress or presidential. Big business should have have put their foot down years ago
  - saberdancer 6y ago
    Interesting take. I disagree that big business or money should influence politics in this way and I hope we don't come to that.
    - Mauricebranagh 6y ago
      Well it might be nice if the US parties moved to OMOV (one Member One Vote) and did away with 19th century style primaries - some of the are still open out cry FFS Only Paid up "members" of a party could vote for candidates using OMOV Having UK style hard limits on campaign costs and have networks run party political broadcasts - would be nice but unachievable.
  - themaninthedark 6y ago
    Sounds like regulatory capture at it's finest.

Jonnax 6y ago

" Business software maker Salesforce.com Inc said on Monday it had “taken action” to prevent its tools from being used by the U.S. Republican National Committee in ways that could lead to further violence around the country’s presidential transition." Why are you editorialising?

notafraudster 6y ago
The "editorialized" title is an exact match for The Verge, so my guess is either Reuters updated their title at some point, or the OP originally submitted The Verge's coverage of the Reuters piece. I do actually feel the dangling question in the title is reasonable -- it is totally unclear who this action affects or how -- but irrespective of the title just wanted to clarify that it's probably not the OP's editorialization.
- NDizzle 6y ago
  Thanks. I read both blurbs but I guess I mismatched the title and the link on accident. Posting from iPad is new for me.
NDizzle 6y ago
In what ways, specifically, have they taken action? If you find more details please request the url be updated to the source with specific information.

prepend 6y ago

Will it get to the point that this is considered “vigilante justice?” We don’t know what was done to the RNC, or why. It’s odd to release such a non-statement, but if the RNC is encouraging violence, that’s breaking laws and should be prosecuted. If they haven’t violated laws, and there’s no injunction then Salesforce is serving in the role of punisher. I get that it’s their service and they can legally serve whomever they like, but line item vetoing people and companies based on an arbitrary, changing criteria leads to mistakes and generally bad business. If I have to think about whether one day my dashboard software will turn off because one of my executives does something bad, then that’s going to make me not want to use it. This is a slippery slope argument, of course, and I should have good executives. But I don’t think I want to buy software from services that could just one day decide to stop serving me for an unclear reason.

_jal 6y ago
> for an unclear reason. I have no comment on the rest of your commentary, but the reason this happened is one of the few things in this story that is quite clear.
- prepend 6y ago
  I’m clear on why trump was banned. Clear that a coup was attempted and lots of people will, hopefully, be brought to justice. I’m not clear on why the RNC would be kicked off. I’m not being facetious, why was the RNC whatevered by Salesforce?
  - matthewdgreen 6y ago
    According to this article [0], the reason given is that they were using Salesforce products to send fundraising emails that claimed the election was stolen. [0] https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2021/01/11/salesforce-says-it-has-taken-action-against-rnc-email-campaign-that-falsely-claims-election-fraud/ https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2021/01/11/salesforce-says...
    - 6y ago

atian 6y ago

You see, there are at least three states in the US.

jariel 6y ago

Why specifically is the RNC being targeted?

woofyman 6y ago
Because they tried to overthrow an election.
- mcosta 6y ago
  Have they colluded with Russia again?
  - Jonnax 6y ago
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-cyber/senate-panel-backs-intelligence-agencies-on-russia-trump-conclusions-idUSKBN1JT2YB https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-cyber/se... "A Senate Intelligence Committee report released on Tuesday supports three U.S. intelligence agencies’ conclusion that Russia tried to help Donald Trump win the 2016 U.S. presidential election." Are you saying there wasn't collusion?
    - gadders 6y ago
      That article says Russia meddled in the election. There is nothing there to say they did it in coordination with Trump or any of his staff.
    - jariel 6y ago
      Mueller determined the Russians were interfering in the election, but there was no evidence linking Trump to those efforts. Given it was the largest such investigation of it's kind in history with hundreds of witnesses, many of them 'flipped' and singing like birds to avoid jail including Trump's own personal lawyer - it seems there was no collusion. Trump's friends were dirty with Russian money, they were caught lying - and even worse, Trump was apparently trying to obstruct justice. So it's all very bad, but there was no collusion. Many Americans believe there was collusion, which is a belief not based on evidence - you can see the massive irony here. As far as the RNC - if they were involved in the insurrection, then ban them, otherwise I don't think the should be banned as this is going to get out of hand very quickly. Many citizens and police officers died this summer of protests, even if they had more of a kind of legitimacy, they were still obviously dangerous and destructive, and many people supported the violence directly. Around the world, there is all sorts of crazy stuff going on, FB is being accused of hosting some genocidal propaganda in SE Asia, it's going to get rough, we need clear thinking and guidelines. I don't trust corporate America to be the world's arbiter of information.

jtdev 6y ago

This is cancel culture run amok. At some point these tech organizations need to provide tangible evidence of bad actors actually inciting or encouraging violence. Until we see that, these acts of cancelling are merely virtue signaling, and are becoming rather McCarthy like.

ceejayoz 6y ago
https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/wait-a-sec https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/wait-a-sec

paul_f 6y ago

Cancel culture is getting worse. I don't like where this is going at all.

Arubis 6y ago
I am part of a generation that was raised being told: if you don’t like it, and it feels like your vote doesn’t count, well, you can vote with your wallet! And now that’s happening.
- Grustaf 6y ago
  No it’s not. It’s not consumers abandoning Twitter because Trump is there that caused Twitter to ban him. And it’s not because people boycotted iPhones that Apple booted Parler. In most cases it’s the exact opposite. They ban people and things that are incredibly popular on their platforms.
  - baumandm 6y ago
    It's just a second order effect. Apple booted Parler to preemptively avoid the risk of consumers abandoning their platform. Apple's walled garden and strict enforcement of their App Store policies are regularly championed in other threads, demonstrating Apple's strong commitment to both privacy and user experience. Was it the right decision? Would leaving Parler on the App Store have affected their bottom line? Who knows. But you could have asked the same questions when they blocked Xbox Game Pass from the iPhone, which was certainly not politically motivated.
    - Grustaf 6y ago
      You don’t really believe that is why they did that, do you?
king_magic 6y ago
Insurrection culture is getting worse. I don’t like where this is going at all.

tosh 6y ago

CRM is one of the last major software categories that does not have a strong open source offering.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

warning26 6y ago

Good. It's about time that people start treating the RNC as what it has become: a radicalizing cult. Next up, can we please ban multilevel marketing "companies".

notassigned 6y ago
The same logic can be applied to the DNC.
- warning26 6y ago
  Last time I checked, the DNC hasn’t tried to overthrow any elections.

jt2190 6y ago

It appears that mass emails inciting violence and sent from contact@victory.donaldtrump.com were somehow flagged by the bulk email sender, ExactTarget (a SalesForce company): > To send its emails, the Trump campaign uses infrastructure from a company called ExactTarget, an email marketing firm now owned by Salesforce, according to a Motherboard analysis of the emails. The emails are sent in conjunction with the Republican National Committee, according to the emails themselves. In response to a question about whether the company had taken action to prevent Trump from using the "contact@victory.donaldtrump.com" email infrastructure, Salesforce said it had "taken action" against the RNC to "prevent its use of our services in any way that could lead to violence." [1] This “analysis” reads to me like: • someone subscribed to a list • they received emails inciting violence • they contacted ExactTarget and asked them if they were aware/doing anything, and ExactTarget said “yes” [1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkdmdv/salesforce-takes-action-to-prevent-rnc-emails-from-inciting-violence https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkdmdv/salesforce-takes-acti...

saberdancer 6y ago
I'm curious, are there examples of emails inciting violence? I live in Europe, all news we get is filtered through several layers of reporters (mostly incompetent). I will admit, I am not following these news very closely but these emails could be very damning.
saberdancer 6y ago
I've read your link in more detail. I don't think your analysis is accurate. To be exact the part about receiving emails inciting violence. I think there were no such emails, but they asked Salesforce did they do anything about potential future emails inciting violence. Salesforce says yes. They probably either suspended the account or put in some kind of verification step where Salesforce needs to whiteflag the email to go forward. This was they can stop any potential email inciting violence, but still isn't extremely damaging to the company.

spiderfarmer 6y ago

"Taking action" can be as simple as e-mailing RNC staff that they will not send out an e-mail campaign that insinuates violent action is necessary. Completely reasonable. IBM still gets flack for their role in WW2. The GOP right now is in shambles and I would not align myself with this party at this stage.

zthrowaway 6y ago

This is kind of getting out of hand now no? I am disgusted by the Capitol incident and so happy to see Trump on his way out, but we really shouldn’t just go full throttle on banning anyone we don’t like politically now. Stuff like this is going to make the past 4 years happen again even more severely in the future. You want populism and the horrible dictators that can come with that? Keep doing this. We should be trying to unify, not purge an entire political party from our lives. One that is needed to keep power in check. Perhaps the republicans need to completely rebrand and even change their name, that’s totally fine and probably worth doing at this point. But two parties is still better than one. More than two that actually can elect someone would be even better.

enkid 6y ago
We don't know why salesforce did this. The RNC until now has not been denied anything from big tech that I recall. To me, this likely means someone in the RNC wanted to send out an email organizing an angry protest. Salesforce absolutely does not need to help organize an event they feel could lead to violence.
calmlynarczyk 6y ago
I’m a moderate and I already get lumped in as a “Nazi sympathizer” by people in my work and social circles. I know people like me are next to get targeted with this shit. Folks are content to throw around big words like “treason” and “Nazi” in these situations without any in-depth explanation. They should realize as soon as they don’t toe the narrative of the mainstream those same tactics will get used against them. You would have thought we learned this lesson from McCarthyism.

cudgy 6y ago

I’m guessing these clauses in the TOS that allow companies to immediately cancel a dependent relationship are going to be a sticking point during the sales cycle at these and many other companies going forward. Does Netflix (or other streaming services) host data on AWS? You can bet their legal departments are squirming right now at the prospect of losing their storage services due to some controversial show or documentary that they create which causes a stir with some political group in power. Completely stupid move on the part of these companies.

Grustaf 6y ago
Netflix are very strongly liberal though, so I don’t think there’s any such risk.
- cudgy 6y ago
  Netflix will not necessarily be considered “liberal” forever. More importantly, the barely ruling party will not remain liberal forever. Lawyers get paid well to think about these contingencies.
watwut 6y ago
Afaik, Netfix is not breaking TOS of AWS. Parler broke TOS due to threats on it. Parler refused to remove those threads threatening or calling for violence. Section 230 does not cover AWS, so AWS was theoretically liable if next attack happen.
michaelt 6y ago
Eh, companies have knowingly accepted clauses like that for decades. Visa/Mastercard didn't get crippled when they cut off WikiLeaks a decade ago.
- cudgy 6y ago
  What service from Wikileaks is Visa/MasterCard dependent upon? How does that apply here?

Gollapalli 6y ago

I find this particularly disturbing. Not because I think it's anything on the part of Salesforce, but that all these different corporations believe that this is something they HAVE to do. Government's don't just rule by hard power; they also rule by soft power. Soft power is social power. And the fact that companies believe that there will be negative consequences if they do not disavow the party that is now out of power, and all those that supported that party is a very dangerous situation. I think it's bad for business if that level of coercive power, hard or soft, is hanging over companies. I think it's especially bad for startups. Parler was a startup that was rapidly growing, a real startup with an actual ceo and actual investors, and AWS yanked the rug out from under them, and I doubt they'll be the last. I wonder how many promising companies that would otherwise be able to exist because we cared about their products and not their politics are likely to stop before they start, or else die early due to this environment.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
snarf21 6y ago
Governments run on $$$$. Look at the amount that goes into lobbying and PACs. Look at Citizens United. Social power is what can cut the money. Also, maybe these companies don't want a country run by literal Nazis.
- Gollapalli 6y ago
  What precisely was Citizens United trying to do? Can you tell me that before we continue?
  - snarf21 6y ago
    It was to let companies pretend that they are people to bypass campaign contribution limits. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citi...

boredumb 6y ago

The double standard being set in the reaction to rioting and the death of people, police officers and federal agents in this country is going to tear a rift in the USA for decades. As federal buildings were under a siege for months, David Dorn was shot, in Oakland a federal agent was shot, with the "ACAB" rhetoric emboldening people there were 7 police officers ambushed and killed across the country, etc. These are all terrible things and should be punished as equally as storming a DC federal building or killing a DC police officer. The issue is going to be the fall out of how last weeks incident was compared to the months of rioting preceding it that just happened to be for a different cause and encouraged by different politically motivated people and parties. There will be no unity when for months major media outlits and influential politicians are helping gaslight half the country that the riots and deaths were totally uncorrelated at best and quoting MLKs "A riot is the language of the unheard" when evidence became too much to simply ignore. People who are cheering on the politicization of deeming half your own countrymen terrorists because disagreements on social or fiscal policies from the actions of a few of them who feel disenfranchised whether it's taking a few hours of BLM/antifa riots and labeling all left leaning citizens terrorists or taking a stormed capital and applying it to 74.8 million other people who lean right are going destroying this country more than any riot participant could dream of. 2020 (if i'm honest it extends back a lot further than last year) should be taken as a lesson that people can feel completely disenfranchised regardless of if you believe them or if they really are at all, and that disenfranchised people can lash out in terrible ways they otherwise wouldn't find themselves capable. If payment processors, twitter, AWS, salesforce, facebook all decided that actions of the 10% of BLM protestors that turned into violent, destructive and deadly riots represented 100% and applied these same actions we would be seeing even more violence, destruction and death but with the weight of a newly renewed sense of victimization and purpose. We are all going to deeply regret the response of all of these actions throughout the next few years without being able to give them the credit they deserve. (I'd wager the aggressive banning of far left and right wing views from twitter, youtube, facebook is responsible for creating places like parler in the first place for instance, when we censor and disenfranchise people we are only going to distill those feelings and they tend to get uglier)

watwut 6y ago
> People who are cheering on the politicization of deeming half your own countrymen terrorists because disagreements The ones who brought bombs to capitol and RNC could be called terrorists? > payment processors, twitter, AWS, salesforce, facebook all decided that actions of the 10% of BLM protestors that turned into violent, destructive and deadly riots Both twitter and facebook were closing accounts for calling for violence or sending threats overtime at that time. Payment processors and AWS had no equivalent of Parler to remove. > we would be seeing even more violence, destruction and death but with the weight of a newly renewed sense of victimization and purpose There was some sense of victimization, but never on HN. It was only in more radical sections of twitter. Nobody including mainstream leftist people really cared enough about them.

mountainb 6y ago

This is bad for the environment of trust and good faith that the SaaS industry has relied upon for speedy growth. Since I am a registered republican (just a normal, non-political person who ticked the form at the DMV), will I be denied service in the future for something that I had nothing to do with? Will democratic party membership be mandatory to do business in the future, as similar expectations exist in many one party states? If that's the case, "Hello, Fellow Democrats, I Too Am A Democrat Who Believes All the Right Things One Is Supposed To Believe." Sure, this is just targeted to the RNC, but you cannot avoid also intimating that such measures won't be expanded in the future.

salawat 6y ago
This is part of why George Washington warned against the trap of National Political Parties. It never ends well. The factional tug of war inculcates itself as a supreme overarching conflict and priority rather tham having Government doing what it was meant to do. Mitigate universal problems for everybody that can't be handled at lower llevels of abstraction.

LatteLazy 6y ago

It's amazing to me how many comments here (even here) see this as a Liberal conspiracy. Even after the capitol and years of trump bring crazy and and a full ratified, court approved election.

salawat 6y ago
Court has nothing to do with elections, and never should. Further, if the Court's took a chance to make a positive impact by defying tradiion, slowing things down, cracking open every last detail of process, bringing the truth to the light of day, and ensuring everyone was heard and had their concerns met fully to the point where no one could reasonably hold doubt. It would have been unprecedented, and definitely controversial, but I'm certain it would have taken a lot of wind out of the sails of these things.
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  May I ask: do you think Biden won?
  - salawat 6y ago
    I think I'm not a gambling man, and I run strictly on trust but verify. My idealistic view of the world has gotten me burnt/played way too many times. Both points are moot though, because having felt out the both sides of the aisle, I don't see a peaceful resolution moving forward without a lot of transparency, and a lot less "just trust us" out of authorities and a lot less belligerance all around. We are not in a good spot as a country at the moment. This is leagues and above the worst and most divided anyone amongst the folks I know have ever seen the country in their lives, and I've stopped doubting that Murphy will find a way.
    - LatteLazy 6y ago
      What more transpareny would you have liked in your state? What have you been refused access to?
- 6y ago

sto_hristo 6y ago

I wanna know what action is Disney+, HBO Go, Netflix, the WWE, and WWF foundation going to take against Trump?

nunez 6y ago

What does this even mean? This is an incredibly vague article. I'm surprised Reuters published it. Are they going to revoke US RNC's Salesforce accounts? (That sounds draconian.) Are they going to revoke any Salesforce accounts associated with the Trump campaign? (That is still draconian, but justified in light of recent events.)

specialist 6y ago

Just protecting their brand. Just like Disney, Apple, Girl Scouts, etc. Smart move. Deplatforming, censorship, cancel culture, blah blah blah, is just the splash damage. Cue futile outrage and virtue signaling. Sharecroppers shocked, shocked the land lords, seed vendors, and food processors are predators, wholly and solely driven to extract wealth from the productive labor.

dzhiurgis 6y ago

Sounds like vaccine management "tool" they've released recently: https://help.salesforce.com/articleView?id=release-notes.rn_vaccine_mgt.htm&type=5&release=228 https://help.salesforce.com/articleView?id=release-notes.rn_... Note small print: Vaccine management isn’t a product or feature. Rather, it’s a mix of capabilities that an experienced admin or partner can build on the Salesforce platform. It's a pattern they've been following for a while now.

siruncledrew 6y ago

This is like the most vague paragraph Salesforce could have written. “We took action, but we won’t tell you why, or what, or how.” What’s the point of this press release then? I never knew the RNC used Salesforce prior to now anyways.