Read on Twitter
It is indeed scary executives at media companies can shut down the primary communication methods of the US President.
It would also be very scary if laws or executive powers let the President compel private companies to keep hosting him against their will.
No good options here.
It would also be very scary if laws or executive powers let the President compel private companies to keep hosting him against their will.
No good options here.
Quick addendum: I support their banning him now, and I was for their banning him 4 years ago. This is not censorship, he was being given a political waiver from TOCs he violated hourly.
HOWEVER, the power at evidence here is genuinely scary and could be abused.
HOWEVER, the power at evidence here is genuinely scary and could be abused.
I also find the "he doesn't have to use Twitter/Facebook" replies somewhat incongruous.
Either social is a big deal, in which case a President's being banned from it is, or it isn't in which case why were we all screaming for them to ban him?
Either social is a big deal, in which case a President's being banned from it is, or it isn't in which case why were we all screaming for them to ban him?
If you don't find the de is by executives to ban him for TOC violations problematic (very fair) can we at least admit their decision not to ban him for TOC violations every day for 4 years is problematic AF?
