Even the ACLU raises concerns about Trump and others being banned from social media

[DigitalDrifter]

Of course however, they had to take the opportunity to display their left biases in their statement.


“We understand the desire to permanently suspend him now, but it should concern everyone when companies like Facebook and Twitter wield the unchecked power to remove people from platforms that have become indispensable for the speech of billions — especially when political realities make those decisions easier,” said Kate Ruane, ACLU senior legislative counsel, in a statement. “President Trump can turn to his press team or Fox News to communicate with the public, but others — like the many Black, Brown, and LGBTQ activists who have been censored by social media companies — will not have that luxury.”



ACLU raises concerns amid Trump Twitter ban

ACLU raises concerns amid Trump Twitter ban - Washington latest

 

[Moonglow]

Then let them fight it out in the courts where it has always been done.

 

[pknopp]

No, they are not concerning that Trump was removed. They note they understand why he was removed. They are concerned about others being removed. There isn't much to go on there until and if it happens.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

The banning of Trump or any other figures who are denied access to the internet purely on political grounds
is the reason why Twitter or Facebook or any other Big Tech monopolists should be broken up or regulated.

Why are we protecting anti First Amendment entities?

 

[blackhawk]

Facebook and Twitter are proving more and more they are not platforms for free speech but publishers and need to be treated as such.

 

[Care4all]

When you ban people, it just eliminates even more so, being able to know what half of your fellow Americans are concerned with.... even if it all is fake news..... it divides us even more, with no opportunity to dispute the fake claims, cuz we didn't even know they existed.

Banning is something that should be done very very sparingly.

Twitter believed Trump was continuing to incite violence, n his coded Trump Talk....
Which they have seen for years in other posts....

They believed he was telling his rebellious tweet followers, Wink Wink, I won't be at the inauguration, the coast is CLEAR for you, to cause more havoc.

 

[Moonglow]

The banning of Trump or any other figures who are denied access to the internet purely on political grounds
is the reason why Twitter or Facebook or any other Big Tech monopolists should be broken up or regulated.

Why are we protecting anti First Amendment entities?

Why do you post on USMB when they do the same?

 

[DigitalDrifter]

They are private companies, and they can do as they wish, however, once it's deemed these social media sites have become the nation's town squares, then it becomes of great concern that they pick and choose whose speech gets on and which do not.

 

[Moonglow]

Facebook and Twitter are proving more and more they are not platforms for free speech but publishers and need to be treated as such.

I suggest you rent office space in a strip mall and start up a totally free network of social sites where no one is ever banned and they can say and do as they please...You'll enjoy it, really..

 

[Unkotare]

No, they are not concerning that Trump was removed. They note they understand why he was removed. They are concerned about others being removed. There isn't much to go on there until and if it happens.

By the time dupes like you get the picture, it will be too late for you. Just as intended.

 

[pknopp]

No, they are not concerning that Trump was removed. They note they understand why he was removed. They are concerned about others being removed. There isn't much to go on there until and if it happens.

By the time dupes like you get the picture, it will be too late for you. Just as intended.

As seems so often typical a lame insult as opposed to addressing what I said.

 

[Ben Thomson]

Of course however, they had to take the opportunity to display their left biases in their statement.


“We understand the desire to permanently suspend him now, but it should concern everyone when companies like Facebook and Twitter wield the unchecked power to remove people from platforms that have become indispensable for the speech of billions — especially when political realities make those decisions easier,” said Kate Ruane, ACLU senior legislative counsel, in a statement. “President Trump can turn to his press team or Fox News to communicate with the public, but others — like the many Black, Brown, and LGBTQ activists who have been censored by social media companies — will not have that luxury.”



ACLU raises concerns amid Trump Twitter ban

ACLU raises concerns amid Trump Twitter ban - Washington latest

The rules that tweeter has in place are very clear..you are not allowed to incite violent behavior...now the Trumpkins are crying that he was banned?

 

[forkup]

Of course however, they had to take the opportunity to display their left biases in their statement.


“We understand the desire to permanently suspend him now, but it should concern everyone when companies like Facebook and Twitter wield the unchecked power to remove people from platforms that have become indispensable for the speech of billions — especially when political realities make those decisions easier,” said Kate Ruane, ACLU senior legislative counsel, in a statement. “President Trump can turn to his press team or Fox News to communicate with the public, but others — like the many Black, Brown, and LGBTQ activists who have been censored by social media companies — will not have that luxury.”



ACLU raises concerns amid Trump Twitter ban

ACLU raises concerns amid Trump Twitter ban - Washington latest

It's a complicated set of variables. Speech has the ability to rile up people to the point that it causes great harm. Wars have started because of demagoguery. I don't like any curbing of free speech, but I don't believe free speech should be unrestrained. To give a cliche in this argument," you don't yell fire in a crowded place". If Twitter is correct and I have no reason to doubt it and tweets by Trump are taken by some of his followers as a call to cause violence and in light of the fact that this week has proven it is not merely a hypothetical I can't say I disagree. It will of course always be a judgment call as to where you draw the line.

 

[pknopp]

Of course however, they had to take the opportunity to display their left biases in their statement.


“We understand the desire to permanently suspend him now, but it should concern everyone when companies like Facebook and Twitter wield the unchecked power to remove people from platforms that have become indispensable for the speech of billions — especially when political realities make those decisions easier,” said Kate Ruane, ACLU senior legislative counsel, in a statement. “President Trump can turn to his press team or Fox News to communicate with the public, but others — like the many Black, Brown, and LGBTQ activists who have been censored by social media companies — will not have that luxury.”



ACLU raises concerns amid Trump Twitter ban

ACLU raises concerns amid Trump Twitter ban - Washington latest

It's a complicated set of variables. Speech has the ability to rile up people to the point that it causes great harm. Wars have started because of demagoguery. I don't like any curbing of free speech, but I don't believe free speech should be unrestrained. To give a cliche in this argument," you don't yell fire in a crowded place". If Twitter is correct and I have no reason to doubt it and tweets by Trump are taken by some of his followers as a call to cause violence and in light of the fact that this week has proven it is not merely a hypothetical I can't say I disagree. It will of course always be a judgment call as to where you draw the line.

You can legally yell "Fire" in a crowded theater. That is protected speech. Now if you cause panic and someone gets hurt, then you can be held accountable.

That is the argument here. Trump's words caused people to become harmed.

 

[impuretrash]

No, they are not concerning that Trump was removed. They note they understand why he was removed. They are concerned about others being removed. There isn't much to go on there until and if it happens.

"If" it happens? It's been happening, for years. Not to black n brown LGBTQs of course because they're the ones who run cancel culture in the first place but everyone else is fair game. One misstep and it's over for you. It's really doing a number on young white kids who live on social media. It's no wonder so many are coming out as trans or devoting themselves to some kind of bizarre sex fetish.

 

[pknopp]

No, they are not concerning that Trump was removed. They note they understand why he was removed. They are concerned about others being removed. There isn't much to go on there until and if it happens.

"If" it happens? It's been happening, for years. Not to black n brown LGBTQs of course because they're the ones who run cancel culture in the first place but everyone else is fair game. One misstep and it's over for you. It's really doing a number on young white kids who live on social media. It's no wonder so many are coming out as trans or devoting themselves to some kind of bizarre sex fetish.

If you can find an example we can comment on it. If not..............

 

[Ben Thomson]

Of course however, they had to take the opportunity to display their left biases in their statement.


“We understand the desire to permanently suspend him now, but it should concern everyone when companies like Facebook and Twitter wield the unchecked power to remove people from platforms that have become indispensable for the speech of billions — especially when political realities make those decisions easier,” said Kate Ruane, ACLU senior legislative counsel, in a statement. “President Trump can turn to his press team or Fox News to communicate with the public, but others — like the many Black, Brown, and LGBTQ activists who have been censored by social media companies — will not have that luxury.”



ACLU raises concerns amid Trump Twitter ban

ACLU raises concerns amid Trump Twitter ban - Washington latest

Remidns me of the time the ACLU went to bat for oxyhead Limbaugh and his fight to stay out of jail for drug abuse.

 

[Ben Thomson]

Facebook and Twitter are proving more and more they are not platforms for free speech but publishers and need to be treated as such.

Inciting violence and sedition is not protected free speech.

 

[impuretrash]

No, they are not concerning that Trump was removed. They note they understand why he was removed. They are concerned about others being removed. There isn't much to go on there until and if it happens.

"If" it happens? It's been happening, for years. Not to black n brown LGBTQs of course because they're the ones who run cancel culture in the first place but everyone else is fair game. One misstep and it's over for you. It's really doing a number on young white kids who live on social media. It's no wonder so many are coming out as trans or devoting themselves to some kind of bizarre sex fetish.

If you can find an example we can comment on it. If not..............

You'd just reject evidence anyway and say they deserved what they got.

 

[MisterBeale]