5 ms·

Trump was live for millions of people just last week. I'm not sure how you could say Trump is censored. He can get on TV and talk whenever he wants.

• systemvoltage 5y ago
  Yes, I understand that Twitter is a private platform and it’s not censorship through government. I still have a problem with this. It doesn’t sit well. Big Tech is a proxy for official communications of Gov and banning a political opponent is just so wrong. The timing of this ban was so blatantly obvious - as soon as Biden took oath, Trump was booted off. Other part of me thinks “Twitter is so much better without Trump”. I’m with you all.
  • rootusrootus 5y ago
    > The timing of this ban was so blatantly obvious - as soon as Biden took oath, Trump was booted off. There may have been another event that occurred right about the same time which had more impact on Twitter's decision to boot him from the platform.
    • deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  • shadowgovt 5y ago
    Trump was removed from Twitter and Facebook on January 6th, not January 20th. There are few things that can dampen First Amendment protections (to say nothing of Section 230 protections). Incitement to violence or insurrection is one of them (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action), and on January 6th, Twitter and FB made the judgement call that it was too likely that's what the President was doing. Perhaps if one turns one's head and squints, one could consider it government censorship because the CEOs of those companies didn't want any risk at all they'd be hauled into a Congressional oversight (or a court) over the use of their platforms in aiding and abetting an insurrection, but it's a strange type of government censorship that censors the President, isn't it? It's not entirely out of the realm of possibility in the US, given that Congress and the Courts are independent branches; perhaps one could make a claim that Congress can apply indirect pressure to shape what a President may say. (There is, perhaps, more to be said on the topic in terms of why he's still banned from those sites).
• PontifexMinimus 5y ago
  > I'm not sure how you could say Trump is censored. Did you not read the article? Its whole point is the new authoritarians are a lot more flexible than the old ones. They are about reducing the spread of dissenting thought, rather than eradicating it altogether. As the article says: "Friction is about making it harder and less convenient to access unapproved material." Banning Trump from Twitter doesn't make it impossible to access what he says, but it does make it harder. You are less likely to read what he says, unless you specifically go looking for it. Twitter's censorship of Trump means a lot fewer people will know what he says, which is its goal.
  • krapp 5y ago
    >Banning Trump from Twitter doesn't make it impossible to access what he says, but it does make it harder. You are less likely to read what he says, unless you specifically go looking for it. Oh noes. Anyone who wants to know what Trump is saying has to experience the momentary and minor inconvenience of discovering a URL on the open internet. Once then bookmarking it or something. The horror.
  • myko 5y ago
    > Twitter's censorship of Trump means a lot fewer people will know what he says, which is its goal. This is a net positive, insurrectionists should not be given a platform.
• the_doctah 5y ago
  What other label would you give to the action of banning his Twitter account?
  • AgentME 5y ago
    Is it bad censorship every time when anyone gets banned on a forum?
    • systemvoltage 5y ago
      It’s a smooth spectrum from average joe to a political opponent and ex-President.