Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#501

Post by sandworm101 »

deadbeefisahex wrote: post #374
sandworm101 wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> time to get 'cozy' with the new people in power and set up those dinners That is the system. Companies that want to make money need to keep on the good side of people in power. But isn't that how democracy works? Better that they adapt to every incoming elected administration than have them hold loyalties to old regimes. Seeing them so regularly bend to the will of voters isn't a horrible thing.

that's hardly the case though, big corps are effectively lobbying the government for big profits. they do have their lobbyists already set up for both parties it's not not the time to spend the time or the energy on the losing side for the next 4 years.

My point was that at least they are lobbying those who have been elected. That is democracy ticking along as planned. If they were instead lobbying non-elected people such as former presidents or family patriarchs, that would be undemocratic.

Seeing companies cozy up to elected officials reassures me that those elected officials still wield power. When companies abandon elected officials, ignore them as irrelevant, then we know that our elected representatives are not in charge and democracy no longer matters.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#502

Post by frob »

esja wrote: post #391
rat87 wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah I'm sure this had nothing to do with the attempted coup

Genuine request as I've seem this framing a lot and cannot understand it: Can you point to the specific things that occurred which you believe were part of an attempted coup, and why you believe they were?

Exhibit A: Trump's attempted coercion of the GA secretary of state to overturn a certified and triple-counted election.

Exhibit B: Rudy going around and encouraging Republican state legislatures to throw out the vote of the people and instead appoint Donald Trump.

Exhibit C: Trump continuing to tell his supporters that they're right to be angry and this whole election was an undemocratic coup against him even when ostensibly telling them to go home hours after they've breached the Capitol building.

Exhibit D: Literally everything else Trump and his cronies have said over the past 2 months and the past 5.5 years.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#503

Post by lovecg »

Dirlewanger wrote: post #301
kevinmgranger wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're more or less encouraging a coup, the "fire in a crowded theater" analogy couldn't be more applicable.

Stop saying it was a coup. A bunch of mostly unarmed morons weren't overtaking anything.

Did you miss the part where the mob violently overtook the Capitol Building?

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#504

Post by EchoReflection »

Both twitter and Facebook are doing a great job of betraying their proclaimed purposes and becoming arbiters of what people can and can't see on the internet. That seems pretty orwellian/dystopian and is very similar to what goes on in communist China, where the government shuts down websites all the time for showing things that the CCP doesn't want people to see. :(

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#506

Post by jturpin »

th0ma5 wrote: post #231

All of these HN comments are defending shouting "Fire!" falsely in a theater under the guise of it being a slippery slope before all speech is lost. I have lost a lot of respect for these slippery slope arguments because they are easy to make and ignore the obvious problem which is that some speech shouldn't be tolerated... Especially intolerant or harmful speech.

Freedom of speech is important enough to where the logic of disallowing shouting fire in a theater should not be taken for granted. There are few if any black and white cases to be had here - it might seem like that since we are living in times where "reasonable" speech has always been well tolerated and supported, so it seems like a non-issue for us.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#507

Post by chasd00 »

gameswithgo wrote: post #271
hartator wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What policies he pushed you are not happy with? Less taxes, no new wars, and leaving each state making their own decisions for covid-19 seems pretty center right to me.

1. less taxes I am not happy with 2. immigrant children in cages 3. easing of environmental rules 4. pulling out of climate deal 5. pulling out of iran deal 6. lying about the election being a fraud, and causing insurrection 7. pardoning his criminal cronies

and btw, if the dividers were office cube dividers instead of chain link would you still call it a "cage" ?

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#508

Post by actusual »

matz1 wrote: post #276
th0ma5 wrote: post #231

All of these HN comments are defending shouting "Fire!" falsely in a theater under the guise of it being a slippery slope before all speech is lost. I have lost a lot of respect for these slippery slope arguments because they are easy to make and ignore the obvious problem which is that some speech shouldn't be tolerated... Especially intolerant or harmful speech.

> which is that some speech shouldn't be tolerated who get to decide what should/shouln't be tolerated ? harmful/harmful ? facebook ?

well...yes, facebook gets to decide. It's their platform after all. They have a responsibility to their shareholders, not some nebulous definition of "freedom of speech", or the American people, or anything else. They are a business designed to make money. If they lose advertisers because they have given Trump a platform, it is their responsibility (to their shareholders) to remove him from the platform.

Build a public option if you want an alternative.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#509

Post by stevenhubertron »

minimaxir wrote: post #331
matz1 wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which is that some speech shouldn't be tolerated who get to decide what should/shouln't be tolerated ? harmful/harmful ? facebook ?

"Inciting a coup" is a pretty unambiguous bar for harmful speech.

and even if you didn't think that was enough. The fact that if they would have been successful it would have meant a certain civil war which would have been bad for Facebook's business. So even from a completely revenue based view it is good business for Facebook to do this at this time.
Post reply on HN