3 ms·

Most of those people are still fighting global capitalism though. Six American tech giants, more or less, having a global monopoly on media discourse, advertisi

Most of those people are still fighting global capitalism though. Six American tech giants, more or less, having a global monopoly on media discourse, advertising, and payment processing... Well, that's exactly what they were warning us about. I'm not a fan of Donald Trump, but the fact that half-a-dozen mega corporations can effectively silence the American president is frightening.

adrianN 6y ago
Well it's the politician's own fault if they use Twitter et al to communicate. It's not like they don't have the means to make their voices heard in other ways. Imo we should ban all politicians (and police departments etc) from using platforms controlled by private entities for official communication.
- bjourne 6y ago
  You completely missed my point. An incredibly small group of people have amassed an incredibly large amount of power. That is not good for Democracy.
  - adrianN 6y ago
    Has that ever been different? I can't think of a time in history where power wasn't held by just a handful of people.
    - bjourne 6y ago
      Yes, it has been different. Global power-inequality has never been greater than at the present.
pricecomstock 6y ago
Silence? Or just force him to use the means of communication used by every other president in history? Obviously there is some interesting power here that I'm not sure if I feel comfortable with Twitter having, but having to use press releases and TV speeches instead of hammering a first draft tweet out into the internet is what the vast majority of presidential communication has been
- mod 6y ago
  The vast majority of presidential communication took place before Twitter existed. Every notable politician that I know of has a Twitter now, and uses it to some extent. I truly wish DJT hadn't used twitter, like ever. But he did, and it was his main outlet, and then he was silenced on it. I personally don't think that's okay (while still supporting the idea that Twitter had the right to do that). It's patently obvious to everyone that they're playing sides, when it's convenient. Not just enforcing their TOS or something.
darksaints 6y ago
He has a full time press secretary, multiple media assistants, and the white house press corps is considered elite tier journalism territory with journalists practically begging to be let in. He can walk out on camera at literally any moment, and immediately have an audience of millions. But he chooses a private platform with a TOS that he has never abided by. That's on him.

adrianN 6y ago

Well it's the politician's own fault if they use Twitter et al to communicate. It's not like they don't have the means to make their voices heard in other ways. Imo we should ban all politicians (and police departments etc) from using platforms controlled by private entities for official communication.

bjourne 6y ago
You completely missed my point. An incredibly small group of people have amassed an incredibly large amount of power. That is not good for Democracy.
- adrianN 6y ago
  Has that ever been different? I can't think of a time in history where power wasn't held by just a handful of people.
  - bjourne 6y ago
    Yes, it has been different. Global power-inequality has never been greater than at the present.

pricecomstock 6y ago

Silence? Or just force him to use the means of communication used by every other president in history? Obviously there is some interesting power here that I'm not sure if I feel comfortable with Twitter having, but having to use press releases and TV speeches instead of hammering a first draft tweet out into the internet is what the vast majority of presidential communication has been

mod 6y ago
The vast majority of presidential communication took place before Twitter existed. Every notable politician that I know of has a Twitter now, and uses it to some extent. I truly wish DJT hadn't used twitter, like ever. But he did, and it was his main outlet, and then he was silenced on it. I personally don't think that's okay (while still supporting the idea that Twitter had the right to do that). It's patently obvious to everyone that they're playing sides, when it's convenient. Not just enforcing their TOS or something.

darksaints 6y ago

He has a full time press secretary, multiple media assistants, and the white house press corps is considered elite tier journalism territory with journalists practically begging to be let in. He can walk out on camera at literally any moment, and immediately have an audience of millions. But he chooses a private platform with a TOS that he has never abided by. That's on him.