222
Restrictions on Donald Trump's Facebook and Instagram lifted (www.bbc.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/news@lemmy.world
57 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Meta has lifted the final restrictions on Donald Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts in the run up to US presidential elections in November.

The ex-US president and convicted felon’s accounts were suspended in 2021 after he praised supporters who stormed the US Capitol on 6 January.

Trump’s accounts, which combined have over 60 million followers, were re-instated in 2023 but subject to additional monitoring, which has now been removed, the social media giant said in a blog post.

Meta said it had a responsibility to allow political expression and that Americans should be able to hear from presidential nominees on an equal basis.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -26 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The problem is that it fundamentally makes them a political org to choose one side over the other. There are very strong arguments that insisting on "no political discussion" is an inherently conservative stance, but by allowing one candidate to speak but the other to not they are implicitly supporting the former.

And the US Government has made it clear that they don't consider a violent insurrection to be treason. So why should facebook go to bat and make themselves an even bigger target come January?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The problem is that it fundamentally makes them a political org to choose one side over the other.

    And the US Government has made it clear that they don’t consider a violent insurrection to be treason.

    No they didn't. They prosecuted a LOT of people for that.

    So why should facebook go to bat and make themselves an even bigger target come January?

    That's the reason. Fuck Facebook's own rules, they are trying to mitigate an attack by a fascist dictator.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 2 years ago*

    No they didn’t. They prosecuted a LOT of people for that.

    And we just had a supreme court ruling that gives the ringleader immunity for anything he will ever do because he was POTUS for four years.

    Individual users? Yeah, ban them because the law applies to them. Orange shitstain? There is no legal ground for him having commit treason so it is purely a decision by the moderation staff of a company who don't want to get navy seals knocking on the door come January.

    That’s the reason. Fuck Facebook’s own rules, they are trying to mitigate an attack by a fascist dictator.

    Yes. I said that was the reason. Glad we are in agreement.

    And considering the American People would rather bicker over whether Biden is old than "holy fuck the nazis have a publicly available plan for how they are going to destroy the country"... when The People clearly won't have your back, why fight on their behalf?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    The problem is that it fundamentally makes them a political org to choose one side over the other

    Yes. They have once again sided against their own rules and the law in favor of unlimited disinformation and calls for violence.

    NOT because they're taking a stand against unfair censorship. The real reason is that his stochastic terrorism breeds TONS of engagement and thus advertising income and marketable data.

    but by allowing one candidate to speak but the other to not they are implicitly supporting the former.

    That would have been true if either both or neither had exhibited a pattern of blatant contempt for the rules of the platform. Since only one did that, it's preferential treatment to NOT kick him off permanently.

    And the US Government has made it clear that they don't consider a violent insurrection to be treason

    Prosecutors sacrifying full justice and accuracy in exchange for an easier path to conviction isn't the US government making anything clear.

    So why should facebook go to bat and make themselves an even bigger target come January?

    Because aiding and abetting a fascist uprising by voiding the rules that everyone else has to abide by isn't an admirable or even acceptable thing to do.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent