9 ms·
Trump’s Truth Social Is Banning Users Who Post About Jan. 6 Hearings
- AdmiralAsshat 4y agoSomeone should sue them in Texas. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/09/texas-bans-online-censorship-with-law-similar-to-one-already-blocked-in-florida/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/09/texas-bans-onlin...
- ceejayoz 4y agoA judge correctly put that on ice, and even this SCOTUS should have no trouble finalizing the “nope”.
- Imnimo 4y ago> This chapter applies only to a social media platform that functionally has more than 50 million active users in the United States in a calendar month. The law is sculpted to not apply to things like Truth Social.
- manquer 4y agoWhile there well be political motive behind that clause, it is still inherently sound to have a lower limit. We wouldmy want say hackernews to be regulated the same way as twitter /Facebook after all.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- HlessClaudesman 4y agoThey can't handle the Truth.
- h2odragon 4y agoSafest course. Remember Parler.
- bediger4000 4y agoI didn't follow that, what should I remember?
- dylan604 4y agoThat might just be the point ;P
- the_third_wave 4y agoSomething along these lines: 1: users post about the hearings and start a yarn about Trump not having lost for real, the election being stolen, etc. 2: the web and its brother get up in arms about the fake news being spread on TS 3: TS gets its domain revoked, its web hosting is dropped, backbone providers start dropping traffic to it, the electricity company filters electrons bound for TS servers, etc. 4: TS disappears down the same hole Parler fell in...
- HKH2 4y agoGab is still around.
- greatpostman 4y ago
- bediger4000 4y agoOh bullshit. It was on live TV we all saw it, we saw who did it, and we see the implications. Jan 6 was a violent insurrection, which fortunately failed. Under the rule of law, we should punish those who revolted, and punish the organizers.
- burnmurderloot 4y agoWe watched politicians and celebrities bail out folks terrorizing our cities for months on end while calling for them to harass political opponents. Those same politicians are calling this mostly peaceful protest illegitimate. The dishonesty and double standard is on open display, and the refusal to have an honest discussion only fuels the fire. The same fire used to justify further fuel.
- jonnycomputer 4y ago"this mostly peaceful protest illegitimate" What mostly peaceful protest was that?
- bediger4000 4y agoDenver's was, after the cops quit provoking the protesters. Source: I lived just south of downtown while they happened.
- shawkinaw 4y agoNo, the tactic used in non-democratic societies is to take power by force, which is what was attempted on January 6.
- giraffe_lady 4y agoTrying former heads of state for crimes committed in office is also a norm in countries with an established tradition of democratic governance: france, italy, south korea, germany for example.
- bediger4000 4y agoI was taught that the American way to counter "bad speech" was to do more good speech. That is, it's socialist, or worse, communist, to censor speech and ban people. What has gone wrong at Truth Social?!?
- feet 4y agoMore speech! More guns!
- draw_down 4y ago
- drocer88 4y agoIf you missed it on Truth Social, you can catch it on CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, BBC, Youtube, CNBC, Twitter, Facebook.
- tzs 4y agoFox too. I went to watch regular syndicated comedy programming on a local TV station that is also a secondary Fox news and sports station, and the regular programming was preempted to carry Fox coverage of the hearings. There didnt seem to any commentary or analysis. Just videos of testimony and extensive clips of the events at the Capitol, most of which where pretty unflattering to those who swarmed the place.
- WalterGR 4y agohttps://www.npr.org/2022/06/10/1104116455/fox-news-jan-6-hearing https://www.npr.org/2022/06/10/1104116455/fox-news-jan-6-hea...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- drocer88 4y agoDid the super moderators knock down the votes on this? Doesn't fit "the narrative"? Not complaining ( which is not permitted by the rules). Just asking.
- soheil 4y agoHow dare they ban users, what about free speech, censorship has no place, think how awful authoritarian regimes treat their population. What about democracy! /s
- Zigurd 4y agoIf only a billionaire would buy that social media site in the name of free speech.
- clintonwoo 4y agoThere's something quite ironic about calling your social network Truth and not having any ability to hold yourself to standards of accountability to "truth" at all. It's a very hypocritical name, no matter whether it was a quality offering or not.
- ajsnigrutin 4y ago
- throw457 4y agoMissed the last 6 years of internet discussions right there mate.
- josephcsible 4y agoI don't think "noone" was the best way to describe it, but I do think GP was onto something. How about this instead? The people making the biggest deal about this are the same people who are always downplaying and justifying Twitter's rampant censorship.
- anonymousab 4y agoTwitter doesn't claim to be "America's "Big Tent" social media platform that encourages an open, free, and honest global conversation without discriminating against political ideology".
- bediger4000 4y agoThat's better. And also true, because they're pointing out hypocrisy on the part of Truth Social and the "censorship" whiners
- josephcsible 4y agoBut isn't pointing out hypocrisy considered "whataboutism" and a bad thing now?
- throw457 4y ago
- monkey_monkey 4y agoNot sure people are 'bothered' by it, more amused at the irony. At least that's my reaction.
- NelsonMinar 4y agoRisky to be banning users when they have so few of them. Note the SPAC that financed TMTG is under SEC investigation: https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/spac-tied-trumps-social-media-venture-receives-us-regulatory-inquiries-2021-12-06/ https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/spac-tied-tru...
- alexdumitru 4y agoIts the first company I've shorted without any doubts.
- GiorgioG 4y agoThe best thing we can do is just pretend the network doesn’t exist. Ignore it and it won’t be news. Don’t feed the beast.
- civilized 4y agoI tried to search for Trump's account. It's really difficult to find it with any search engine. Google, Bing, Yahoo, Yandex and Baidu all failed to turn it up. I had to use "site:truthsocial.com Trump" on Google and even then it was nowhere near top result. How hard can it be to get your most popular user into any search engine?
- jtdev 4y ago
- LoveGracePeace 4y ago"How hard can it be to get your most popular user into any search engine?" Is it a telling find that something you'd expect to be easier to find, isn't? Who is really banning whom.
- civilized 4y agoYandex and Baidu don't find it either. I think the problem is the media are not linking to it, not even conservative media. When no one cares about what you're saying enough to link to it, search engines don't assign importance to it.
- netsharc 4y agoClaims need evidence. After VPNing because apparently foreigners (or Americans living in foreign countries) can't handle the truth, I checked their robots.txt[1]: User-agent: * Disallow: / But "Oh no, the dirty woke leftie search engines are banning us!"... Since we all know it's Trump little website/he'd be the most famous user (is he even still there?) I'd expect his profile is linked from the homepage, but that's not the case either... [1] https://truthsocial.com/robots.txt https://truthsocial.com/robots.txt
- sdf4j 4y agoShocking.
- jvanderbot 4y agoFree speech indeed.
- ulfw 4y agofound just now on truthsocial.com: "Truth Social is America's "Big Tent" social media platform that encourages an open, free, and honest global conversation without discriminating against political ideology." followed by: "Access denied You do not have access to truthsocial.com. The site owner may have set restrictions that prevent you from accessing the site. Contact the site owner for access or try loading the page again." Enough said.
- jtdev 4y ago
- osrec 4y agoI feel bad for him, as he's going to generate a lot of ill will towards himself in his twilight years. He seems to have bitten off more than he can chew and really exposed himself, to the point that his own daughter seems to be distancing herself from him. He could have had a great life as the big shot face of The Apprentice, and be fondly remembered for his "YOU'RE FIRED" catch phrase. Instead, he seems to be turning into more of a joke with every passing day. It must trouble him a bit too. SAD.
- oxff 4y ago
- bediger4000 4y agoSo accusations of censorship over this very behavior only apply to certain platforms, but not to Truth Social? Just so I understand your assertion.
- D13Fd 4y agoHow so? I’m asking since I just don’t understand the comment (not because I disagree)
- classified 4y agoIs anyone surprised? The Donald doesn't care for anything but himself and he was willing to ruin the whole nation and what's left of its democracy for his own ego. Hypocrisy comes for free in this package.
- anonymousiam 4y agoThe Variety article (and the Twitter image) are short on details. It would be revealing to see exactly what Travis posted to get himself banned.
- jl6 4y agoIt wasn’t the Bastille-storming moment that it’s talked up to be, but it was still a pretty heinous crime of the sort that high-functioning countries absolutely should be prosecuting.
- cmurf 4y agoLincoln said in his first inaugural address that all constitutional controversies can be separated into majorities and minorities. And that either the majority or minority must acquiesce for the government to continue. He was talking about the minority who just lost the 1860 election, and were refusing to submit to that loss, by seceding. But importantly, minorities sometimes win. There's the bill of rights. There's case law. There's popular vote in presidential elections, contrary to the Electoral College vote - as in Bush 2000 and Trump 2016, in which majorities submitted to the outcome, i.e. they did not revolt. Thus the government continued. Also importantly, Lincoln is pointing out that even a significant minority can be extremely disruptive to civil order, that it is actually a fragile business. And Trump and his pro-autocrat supporters have laid the ground for a significant minority simply refusing to be governed in numbers exceeding law enforcement's ability to contain it. No one can predict whether that'll be attempted or actually succeed, but the Bastille-storming moment is the mere attempt at such a coup, despite being a failed coup, despite it surely failing even had the goals at the Capitol succeeded: assassination of any number of elected officials, stopping the Electoral Vote count or fabricating an alternative outcome... the people who were needed to make a coup succeed simply weren't present in positions of power to make it happen. But we can do counter factuals to analyze whether and how that could have been different, and end up with a different result. Both of Trump's AG's in the last three months following the election told him he lost. Both told him there was no evidence of fraud in any amount that would alter the outcome of the election. Well, what if one of them said he won and that he absolutely had authority and a duty to order the military against the Congress? You'd need multiple members of the armed forces willing to go along with that. It wouldn't just be one. And it's essentially certain armed forces would split, because all of them are trained about military coups and interventions, and the deceptive trap of militaries getting involved in civilian decision making processes. The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012 (written in 1992, imagining a coup had taken place in the U.S. in 2012 - it's been required reading in the various military colleges for at least a couple of decades)
- Tehchops 4y agoIt’s almost as if all the right wing pearl-clutching about “free speech” on Twitter was a bad-faith argument…
- spicyramen_ 4y ago[dead]
- NikolaNovak 4y agoIt's fascinating that this whole post is flagged?
- jonnycomputer 4y agoControversial posts tend to. Sometimes quite unjustifiably, imo. On the other hand, the Vanity piece was just reporting on what a few people said on Twitter. Not real journalism, really.
- spicyramen_ 4y ago
- zephrx1111 4y agoWhat’s wrong with it? Facebook twitter or other left main stream medias are using this method for years.
- kingofpandora 4y agoThe hypocrisy is what's wrong.
- williamstein 4y agoEvidently Truth Social is AGPLv3 open source (based on Mastodon) and publishes their source code here: https://help.truthsocial.com/open-source https://help.truthsocial.com/open-source Wikipedia says "...initially did not make its source code available, violating Mastodon's AGPLv3 license. After Eugen Rochko sent a formal letter to Truth Social's chief legal officer on 26 October 2021,[57] Truth Social published its source code on 12 November 2021." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastodon_(software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastodon_(software)
- nunez 4y agoLol; truth indeed
- spicyramen_ 4y ago