5 ms·

Nick Clegg to decide on Trump’s 2023 return to Instagram and Facebook

• hunglee2 4y ago
  this is where we have got to - a private sector communication platform deciding who has the opportunity to address the people. Regardless of political leanings, we must all surely agree that this is an unsatisfactory state of affairs.
  • smt88 4y ago
    A simple solution is breaking up the monopolies and/or requiring interoperability. Anyone who cares about unfettered speech should be furious at how locked in users are to a small number of companies.
    • hunglee2 4y ago
      a simpler solution would be elevate such platforms to be above the reach of government.
      • smt88 4y ago
        They are already. The government can't tell them what to host and what not to host.
  • jfengel 4y ago
    All of the mechanisms that existed prior to those private sector communications platforms still exist. Twenty years ago, the only people with a national platform were those on TV, in newspapers, in magazines, etc. If this is an unsatisfactory state of affairs, then it was an unsatisfactory state of affairs for 99.9% of human history. It seems especially inapt to call it out in the case of this person, who has singular access to those TV, newspapers, magazines, etc. He has more ability to address the people than pretty much anybody else in history -- even without those private communications platforms. The current state of affairs is, indeed, unsatisfactory, and needs serious attention to balancing the right to speak with the right of people not to be threatened. That was the reason he was removed from those platforms: the legitimate belief that he was attempting to incite violence. We should absolutely attempt to improve the state of affairs, but I don't think it's well informed by this individual.