11–20 of 77 posts
“The public should be able to hear what politicians are saying so they can make informed choices.” Oh that’s hilarious. After tech companies stifling a sitting president, now they are going to straight faced claim this like it means a damn thing. This is insulting to users’ intelligence.
“The public should be able to hear what politicians are saying so they can make informed choices.” Oh that’s hilarious. After tech companies stifling a sitting president, now they are going to straight faced claim this like it means a damn thing. This is insulting to users’ intelligence.
Everything that president said and did was covered by the press around the world, an army of spokespeople and a million online sycophants. He isn't (and certainly wasn't) "stifled" by the banning of his social media accounts. Really, tech companies bent over backwards to accommodate him, gave him far more slack than they would give you or I. And even then he had to cross the line twice.
Hell, he's still the frontrunner for the Republicans in 2024, and the last anyone heard from him was that he was selling NFTs.
The narrative of Trump being silenced by big tech isn't working, find another one already.
“The public should be able to hear what politicians are saying so they can make informed choices.” Oh that’s hilarious. After tech companies stifling a sitting president, now they are going to straight faced claim this like it means a damn thing. This is insulting to users’ intelligence.
I love how everyone just uses the term "sitting president" verbatim now when making this argument, as if the prospect of a president losing their social media accounts is supposed to fill us with dread, sitting or no. It's almost become like a verbal tic. Everything that president said and did was covered by the press around the world, an army of spokespeople and a million online sycophants. He isn't (and certainly w…
“The public should be able to hear what politicians are saying so they can make informed choices.” Oh that’s hilarious. After tech companies stifling a sitting president, now they are going to straight faced claim this like it means a damn thing. This is insulting to users’ intelligence.
Meta finally realizing that folks will happily migrate to other platforms to read what they are interested in. I wonder if they'll change their stance on censorship of certain medical information next?
Did they realize this two years ago when they said that the suspension would last two years? https://about.fb.com/news/2021/06/facebook-response-to-overs... If you got this wrong, consider if you got your medical knowledge wrong too. Try talking to your doctor for medical advice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did they realize this two years ago when they said that the suspension would last two years? https://about.fb.com/news/2021/06/facebook-response-to-overs... If you got this wrong, consider if you got your medical knowledge wrong too. Try talking to your doctor for medical advice.
What a bizarre choice. Why 2 years? to guarantee one election cycle without Trump trying to void the election and lead a army to ransack the Capitol ?
It was insane that this ever happened, honestly. I'm interested to hear what history decides, but it's hard to sympathize with.
It was insane that this ever happened, honestly. I'm interested to hear what history decides, but it's hard to sympathize with.
Didn't he break rules normal people would be banned for?
It was insane that this ever happened, honestly. I'm interested to hear what history decides, but it's hard to sympathize with.