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

EFF's response to social media companies' decisions to block Trump’s accounts

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 164 posts

Re: EFF's response to social media companies' decisions to block Trump’s accounts

#51

Post by jelliclesfarm »

lettergram wrote: post #40

Well, I’ll never be donating again. I’m more concerned about parler being banned or that “hang pence” was trending, but banning the president - who said LEAVE IN PEACE is what we should be doing. I’m against all rioting (all year it feels like) and what happened Jan 6 was horrifying. You know how to simmer tensions? You convince the leaders of said movement to calm followers. banning / arresting / killing all the lea…

>You know how to simmer tensions? You convince the leaders of said movement to calm followers.

this. this is why the deplatforming of a single political leader is confusing.

if trump can calm down the fringe elements, that's what he needs to do. gagging him from ever reaching that base is counter productive.

one day..we will all be looking back at these events and scratch our heads. this course of action makes no sense. its all very strange and surreal. irrational.

Re: EFF's response to social media companies' decisions to block Trump’s accounts

#52

Post by mc32 »

marcinzm wrote: post #50
mc32 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He built a _social_ network with 4 billion users, he didn't build "my blog of religious musings"

So what is the line at which you're not longer able to run a platform you built the way you want? 10 users? 100? 1 million? 1 billion? Or is it just whatever you personally feel qualifies?

Maybe when you spend billions actively recruiting and addicting users and sucking up their personal info to further your social network?

Re: EFF's response to social media companies' decisions to block Trump’s accounts

#53

Post by xpe »

lettergram wrote: post #40

Well, I’ll never be donating again. I’m more concerned about parler being banned or that “hang pence” was trending, but banning the president - who said LEAVE IN PEACE is what we should be doing. I’m against all rioting (all year it feels like) and what happened Jan 6 was horrifying. You know how to simmer tensions? You convince the leaders of said movement to calm followers. banning / arresting / killing all the lea…

> but banning the president - who said LEAVE IN PEACE is what we should be doing.

This is not all he said, nor does this capture the key context.

The argument is simple: the risk of allowing Trump to continue to have access to Facebook and Twitter outweighs the benefit.

I would like to point out that the president has an unmatched ability to put out information, independent of social media, including: whitehouse.gov, press releases, press briefings, and the major television networks.

Re: EFF's response to social media companies' decisions to block Trump’s accounts

#54

Post by xpe »

jelliclesfarm wrote: post #51
lettergram wrote: post #40

Well, I’ll never be donating again. I’m more concerned about parler being banned or that “hang pence” was trending, but banning the president - who said LEAVE IN PEACE is what we should be doing. I’m against all rioting (all year it feels like) and what happened Jan 6 was horrifying. You know how to simmer tensions? You convince the leaders of said movement to calm followers. banning / arresting / killing all the lea…

>You know how to simmer tensions? You convince the leaders of said movement to calm followers. this. this is why the deplatforming of a single political leader is confusing. if trump can calm down the fringe elements, that's what he needs to do. gagging him from ever reaching that base is counter productive. one day..we will all be looking back at these events and scratch our heads. this course of action makes no sen…

> if trump can calm down the fringe elements, that's what he needs to do.

On what basis do you think Trump has the interest in calming the fringe elements? And if he did have the motivation, on what basis do you think he would be successful?

Re: EFF's response to social media companies' decisions to block Trump’s accounts

#55

Post by unit01 »

lettergram wrote: post #40

Well, I’ll never be donating again. I’m more concerned about parler being banned or that “hang pence” was trending, but banning the president - who said LEAVE IN PEACE is what we should be doing. I’m against all rioting (all year it feels like) and what happened Jan 6 was horrifying. You know how to simmer tensions? You convince the leaders of said movement to calm followers. banning / arresting / killing all the lea…

Just commenting to clarify that "hang Pence" trending was associated with folks sharing and retweeting videos of people chanting hang pence at the capitol. It was NOT an incitement to violence and to hang Pence. If anything, it was actually a condemnation of those calling to hang Pence.

Re: EFF's response to social media companies' decisions to block Trump’s accounts

#56

Post by [deleted] »

xpe wrote: post #45

There is a large difference between the EFF (a) promoting privacy protections on social media versus (b) advocating for free speech on social media platforms.[1] I want to emphasize that (b) (free speech on social media) is not protected by the First Amendment. The First Amendment begins with: > Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging…

[deleted]

Re: EFF's response to social media companies' decisions to block Trump’s accounts

#57

Post by grzm »

jelliclesfarm wrote: post #51
lettergram wrote: post #40

Well, I’ll never be donating again. I’m more concerned about parler being banned or that “hang pence” was trending, but banning the president - who said LEAVE IN PEACE is what we should be doing. I’m against all rioting (all year it feels like) and what happened Jan 6 was horrifying. You know how to simmer tensions? You convince the leaders of said movement to calm followers. banning / arresting / killing all the lea…

>You know how to simmer tensions? You convince the leaders of said movement to calm followers. this. this is why the deplatforming of a single political leader is confusing. if trump can calm down the fringe elements, that's what he needs to do. gagging him from ever reaching that base is counter productive. one day..we will all be looking back at these events and scratch our heads. this course of action makes no sen…

> "if trump can calm down the fringe elements, that's what he needs to do."

Trump has never given any indication that he would do this if he could. He's had plenty of opportunities to call out bad behavior and has been at best equivocal when's he's gestured in that direction.

You're right, that it is strange and surreal.

Re: EFF's response to social media companies' decisions to block Trump’s accounts

#58

Post by throwaway13337 »

lettergram wrote: post #40

Well, I’ll never be donating again. I’m more concerned about parler being banned or that “hang pence” was trending, but banning the president - who said LEAVE IN PEACE is what we should be doing. I’m against all rioting (all year it feels like) and what happened Jan 6 was horrifying. You know how to simmer tensions? You convince the leaders of said movement to calm followers. banning / arresting / killing all the lea…

Agreed.

It doesn't sound like the platforms that profit off of our collective division want to do anything to defuse tension.

I'm baffled at how far these companies will go to keep people viewing ads.

Something needs to disempower the newsfeed-driven media companies before the violence snowballs.

Things will only get better when we start trying to find common ground. These media platforms are designed to ensure that doesn't happen.

Re: EFF's response to social media companies' decisions to block Trump’s accounts

#59

Post by _hyrb »

lettergram wrote: post #40

Well, I’ll never be donating again. I’m more concerned about parler being banned or that “hang pence” was trending, but banning the president - who said LEAVE IN PEACE is what we should be doing. I’m against all rioting (all year it feels like) and what happened Jan 6 was horrifying. You know how to simmer tensions? You convince the leaders of said movement to calm followers. banning / arresting / killing all the lea…

Lol what the fuck are you even trying to say.

Edit: To clarify, I do think Trump is the KING of promoting peace. You are correct, and also might I add, very cool. Please give me kiss.

Re: EFF's response to social media companies' decisions to block Trump’s accounts

#60

Post by motohagiography »

shkkmo wrote: post #38
motohagiography wrote: post #33

The idea that this particular U.S. president is exceptional underpins the policies and actions of the platform companies. The EFF has to respond, as this is specifically what they were set up to respond to, sort of what the ACLU's original mandate was. However, that major platform companies are working on behalf of a (still) opposition party to obstruct and suppress a (still) sitting president with some 10 days left…

What rules are you alluding to being broken?

Not a lawyer, but most countries have a rule, if perhaps only a convention, where you don't collude with other businesses to obstruct the sitting head of state, and probably specifically during a state of national emergency. Maybe the U.S. is different, and even if it isn't, the incoming admin won't prosecute it, but it looks bad for tech platforms either way. We indeed live in interesting times.
Post reply on HN