U.S Election 2020 - Page 158

1andrew1 · 09-01-2021, 11:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick

Granted Twitter and Facebook are private companies, but Trump hated him or not is until 20th Jan the Democratically elected President of the United States. They have cut him off his preferred communication channels, in a fascists, overreach way.

Even folks from the other side are questioning the power these Big Techs have:

Jo Maugham:

Anyone celebrating this mass censorship of a political leader just because you hate the man, remember, the pendulum can swing both ways.

If social media owners then can't decide who is banned, which organisation should? Individual governments?

**Chris** · 09-01-2021, 11:21

Quote:

You have the absolute right to free speech. If you find it impossible to abide by this document, then please feel free to contact one of the many good web hosting companies out there and set up an account, create your own discussion board and exercise that right to your hearts content.

https://www.cableforum.uk/about/21/terms-and-conditions

It’s a difficult balancing act though. On the one hand these are commercial enterprises, they have ownership and they get criticised if they allow their property to be used to facilitate criminality. On the other hand they have deliberately sought market dominance and that gives them extraordinary power to control terms of public debate (unlike Cable Forum).

To be honest I’m a little more worried about Google and Apple denying access to their app stores to services like Parler. They are a step removed from what goes on within the app and it is an uncomfortable development if these two companies between them are going to decide this stuff for almost all mobile phone users in most of the world.

Google suspends Parler, Apple threatens to: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55598887

**Damien** · 09-01-2021, 11:22

The issue is they have so much power in being the main communication platforms on the internet that there is a real-world consequence to them deplatforming a politician. That said the flip side of that is there is a real-world consequence to them giving people a platform from which they can incite.

Trump has been a headache for ages for social media companies. I think they probably wanted to do this for ages but now Trump is on his way out, significantly weakened his support in congress and given them a reason they took it.

I really don't know the answer because we also don't want the Government regulating it either.

Mr K · 09-01-2021, 11:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

The issue is they have so much power in being the main communication platforms on the internet that there is a real-world consequence to them deplatforming a politician. That said the flip side of that is there is a real-world consequence to them giving people a platform from which they can incite.

Trump has been a headache for ages for social media companies. I think they probably wanted to do this for ages but now Trump is on his way out, significantly weakened his support in congress and given them a reason they took it.

I really don't know the answer because we also don't want the Government regulating it either.

Pretty clear myself where the line is. If you're advocating, harm injury, or inciting hate, then you're over the line. Otherwise you can spout whatever waffle you want. Trump was over the line repeatedly, not acting sooner has cost lives.

1andrew1 · 09-01-2021, 11:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K

Pretty clear myself where the line is. If you're advocating, harm injury, or inciting hate, then you're over the line. Otherwise you can spout whatever waffle you want. Trump was over the line repeatedly, not acting sooner has cost lives.

Yup - basically he broke the rules of the various social media platforms and the platform owners banned him. As is their right.

This seems to be a rule that holds true regardless of the size of the platform unless you believe that the Government has the right to over-rule site-owners.

If tech companies over-reach themseleves, then I can see governments getting more involved, perhaps insisting on independent appeals procedures, etc for the bigger sites. But I think they've been pretty patient with Trump, perhaps because he has driven large numbers to their platforms and for fear of a backlash from Trump's supporters.

**Damien** · 09-01-2021, 11:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

To be honest I’m a little more worried about Google and Apple denying access to their app stores to services like Parler. They are a step removed from what goes on within the app and it is an uncomfortable development if these two companies between them are going to decide this stuff for almost all mobile phone users in most of the world.

Google suspends Parler, Apple threatens to: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55598887

The biggest question there is if Amazon pull the plug since it's apparently hosted on their AWS services.

Some of the stuff on there though is direct advocacy of violence, it's pretty explicit look though some of the content on there. Even before the weekend, you had people whose Twitter accounts were more moderate whereas on Parlar they were directly advocating for people's deaths.

It might be a step removed from Apple/Google's reach but if the developers of the application are not showing any desire to remove this content and even openly celebrating the fact they won't then I think Apple/Google's decision is made a whole lot easier.

I think that is actually an easier decision than the Trump on Twitter one.

jfman · 09-01-2021, 11:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

On the other hand they have deliberately sought market dominance and that gives them extraordinary power to control terms of public debate (unlike Cable Forum).

However we have the only people worth debating with.

1andrew1 · 09-01-2021, 11:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

The biggest question there is if Amazon pull the plug since it's apparently hosted on their AWS services.

Some of the stuff on there though is direct advocacy of violence, it's pretty explicit look though some of the content on there. Even before the weekend, you had people whose Twitter accounts were more moderate whereas on Parlar they were directly advocating for people's deaths.

It might be a step removed from Apple/Google's reach but if the developers of the application are not showing any desire to remove this content and even openly celebrating the fact they won't then I think Apple/Google's decision is made a whole lot easier.

I think that is actually an easier decision than the Trump on Twitter one.

Yes. I think for Apple in particular it's a reputational one. A disillusioned teenager downloads an app on their iPhone, becomes radicalised and commits grave acts. The parents and media will blame Apple for making this easy.

**Hugh** · 09-01-2021, 12:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick

Granted Twitter and Facebook are private companies, but Trump hated him or not is until 20th Jan the Democratically elected President of the United States. They have cut him off his preferred communication channels, in a fascists, overreach way.

Even folks from the other side are questioning the power these Big Techs have:

Jo Maugham:

Anyone celebrating this mass censorship of a political leader just because you hate the man, remember, the pendulum can swing both ways.

He can still use the POTUS account until then...

On a lighter note (ish)

Quote:

What's the difference between the US Capitol Building and Mordor?

One does not simply walk into Mordor

**Mick** · 09-01-2021, 15:39

No he cannot use potus account, Dorsey locked that one and deleted the tweets Trump posted after his own personal one was locked.

**Chris** · 09-01-2021, 16:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick

No he cannot use potus account, Dorsey locked that one and deleted the tweets Trump posted after his own personal one was locked.

They should phone us for help spotting and banning re-registrations and duplicate accounts, there was a time on CF when we were plagued by idiots and this became a primary mod skill. I’m sure we could come up with a reasonable hourly rate.

1andrew1 · 09-01-2021, 16:31

Quote:

Can Trump be impeached? Democrats plot move to oust 'unhinged' president over nuclear fears

Following the violent siege of the US Capitol, opponents are seeking the White House incumbent's immediate removal from office.

Moves are under way by Democrats in Congress to impeach Donald Trump for a historic second time, amid fears of the "unhinged" president having access to the nuclear codes.

In the wake of the violent siege of the US Capitol by Trump supporters that left five dead, opponents are seeking his immediate removal from office, declaring him "unstable".

With less than two weeks before he is due to leave the White House, there are also those within Mr Trump's own Republican Party who want to see him gone sooner.
On a private conference call with Democrats, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said: "We must take action."

Prominent Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska also told the Anchorage Daily News that Mr Trump "needs to get out".

https://news.sky.com/story/can-trump...fears-12183103

**Damien** · 09-01-2021, 16:37

https://twitter.com/sarajust/status/1347942663778168833

Quote:

Former Vice Presidents are not entitled to lifetime Secret Service protection the way former Presidents are. Trump lit a match that could mean Pence is in danger from this mob and like-minded people forever.

Now, if there was a way Pence could become President before he leaves office in a week......

1andrew1 · 09-01-2021, 16:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

https://twitter.com/sarajust/status/1347942663778168833

Now, if there was a way Pence could become President before he leaves office in a week......

See what you're saying, Pence now has a pretty good motive for impeaching Trump!

**Damien** · 09-01-2021, 16:42

I imagine if there is a serious threat he'll get Secret Service project. Biden could probably order it anyway.