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.
Not the best decision.
Sure it is–for profits. If Trump gets reelected, all those pesky government regulations about the environment and securities will be thrown out window.
Meta is cancer that has metastasized
so that’s what meta is short for
A few days after trump threated to arrest zuck after the election? What a surprise
I hope they know they should hide Mark Zuckerberg’s grave, because that thing is going to be so vandalized when he goes. Ill be the first to take a huge messy shit on it.
Thermite. Ensure that his body gets destroyed
Don’t deny future generations an opportunity. Mummify him and stick the mummy in a pillory.
Seal the neck with fire
The worst of our generation. Like the single worst person from Millennials by a long shot.
You’re assuming this country won’t be blown up before that time. I doubt any of us poors will live to see the day these assholes die. I’ve always wanted to watch trump have an aneurysm while at his Hitler esk rallies. Sadly that probably won’t happen.
We won’t see it, but at least we will die with other people. They’re going out just like those billionaires on the Titanic sub - alone in a hostile environment, scared, banking stupidly on their own hubris instead of science.
Hey, it is rude to shit in a urinal!
And this is why I’m glad I quit using this shit website three years ago.
Why now? Idiots.
“All I can say is that if I’m elected President, we will pursue Election Fraudsters at levels never seen before, and they will be sent to prison for long periods of time,” Trump wrote. “We already know who you are. DON’T DO IT! ZUCKERBUCKS, be careful!”
At the very least, even if Zuck isn’t the best example, it’s worth considering that the further conservatives descend into fascism, the more we’ll see people take the easier option of not resisting.
The amount of projection is incredible.
deleted by creator
$$$
That makes sense. It’s hard to foment an insurrection or race massacre when most of your loyal soldiers don’t use Truth Social.
Also, it doesn’t make sense to give him tons of money ands then restrict him on your website at the same time too.
Oh wow what terrible timing
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.
I hate to say it, but they’re right. They can’t silence one of the two candidates for the presidency.
I would say that staging a coup definitively breaks the TOS.
Removed by mod
Yes they can. They are a private corporate and can do whatever they want as long as it doesn’t target a protected class, and it doesn’t.
And in particular, they didn’t silence him because of politics, but because he was conspiring with insurrectionists. Active treason. Stochastic terrorism.
And in particular, they didn’t silence him because of politics, but because he was conspiring with insurrectionists. Active treason. Stochastic terrorism.
Has he been convicted of that? We can all wring our hands as much as we want, and god knows I’m not a Trump supporter, but Facebook are not going to embroil themselves into a legal battle over this.
He’s been convicted in the court of public opinion. Facebook doesn’t need to wait for a court to bar him from their platform.
They don’t, but it’s much easier for them this way. It’s mind-boggling that so many in this thread want Facebook to go way out on a limb here and are shocked when the multi-billion dollar company takes the much easier, safer way out. Stop expecting tech megacorps to decide the presidential race for you, people. You may think you want that now, but it’s a VERY bad precedent.
You can criticize them while still not expecting them to do the right thing.
They’ve convicted a hell of a lot of other people for it so far.
So Facebook is supposed to block the GOP presidential nominee because other people were charged of a crime and he was not? We’d all like that, but come on.
no, just cuz he broke their rules… repeatedly… and says violent hateful shit… and spreads misinformation. Trump supporters whine about their bans or posts being removed when they post the vile shit they like to spew. Why does Trump get a pass?
Why does Trump get a pass?
Because that’s much easier for Facebook than dealing with the clusterfuck that would result if they didn’t.
So political leaders get a pass to break all the rules? I don’t understand your reasoning. The rules should be applied only to people without power? Facebook should just always take the “easiest” path for moderation?
What about leaders elsewhere that explicitly call for violence or perpetrate it? Is there a line somewhere?
He was banned for years.
Facebook does not have nearly as high a burden of proof as a court of law.
Facebook most likely has a far larger budget for their legal team, too. I don’t think they’d be worried about a lawsuit.
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?
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.
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.
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?
Imagine piping up to defend the non-existent “right” of a self declared fascist to spew his lies. 🤯
Careful not to choke on that boot…
The fact you think I support Trump or Facebook tells me all I need to know about the quality of the discourse in this thread. No wonder the left can’t get anything done in your shithole of a country.
Whether you like it or not, Canada is heavily dependent on said shithole of a country. You’re similarly as fucked as the rest of us if Trump wins and decides to stop protecting Canada or importing their natural resources in favor of domestic production.
That’s meta Being scared that Trump is going to win
I’m sure this time he will respect the rules.
Gotta let a traitor be traitorous because the country might decide we want to overthrow the country again…
I’m pretty sure ‘the country’ decided against overthrowing ‘the country’. The Minority Against Governing in America was largely rebuffed. Though I’m deeply concerned that they have not stopped planning their insurrection, and will try again.
“3 years later, Jan. 6 by the numbers: More than 1,200 charged, more than 460 imprisoned for role in Capitol attack” https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/3-years-jan-6-numbers-1200-charged-460/story?id=106140326
It took the Nazis two tries as well.
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.
Meta said fascists should have their voices heard. Zuck’s a coward, what a fucking surprise.
Trump recently threatened multiple times to jail zuck. I wouldn’t be suprised if that had an impact on this decision.
Zuck’s a coward, what a fucking surprise.
E: though tbf it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if he’s letting trump back on the platform because he wouldn’t mind him winning. After all, trump is good for billionaires, there’s no question about that…
And if he loses, ban him again for saying something malicious and appear to be doing diligence
Terrorism works I guess.
at this point, the people who STILL support trump are going to vote for him regardless. all this accomplishes is giving him another outlet to spew ridiculous bullshit that demonstrates his idiocy and/or incriminates himself
Which allows him to mobilize and weaponize their idiocy. ¡No bueno muchachos!
Yep his poll numbers went up after he was originally banned. Could be a coincidence, but it does make sense.
there are still undecided voters and/or unmotivated voters.
sorry, if someone’s trying to claim they’re “on the fence” about whether to vote for trump or biden, then they just don’t want to say out loud that they’re voting for trump because they know they’ll be (rightly) ridiculed by whoever’s in earshot
unless they know they’re surrounded by troompa loompas. in which case all of a sudden that “on the fence” bullshit goes out the window
Ok, but that’s my point. The more campaigning those people hear from Trump, the more likely that they feel that they’re right and they should go out for Trump. Also, I think there are people who are undecided nonetheless.
