[gogo24]

I'm conflicted on this. On one hand it's for the best because he's violated the TOS so many times and has been inciting violence. But I'm also concerned about the precedence this sets for social media to be able to censor world leaders like this. Does this give them too much power? How could the people keep a check on this if so?

[Haashi]

Twitter basically just suspended Trump according to the TOS, doing that doesn't mean that they have a BIGGER power beside twitter is their property.The problems resides with Trump because the tweets that he posted clearly had an Ulterior motive to it, He knew that his supporters would barge to the US Capital nonetheless to him That ban is just a small price for him, he could even buy the app if he wants to.

[timvu178]

Kinda crazy how the POTUS got his twitter account banned. Says a lot about the US

[SeasAndStars]

If you're going to ban someone just because the ideas they propagate can incite violence, you will have to ban virtually everyone. Most political ideologies are capable of contributing to the possibility of violence



I find it interesting that Twitter banned the president of the US for inciting violence, meanwhile, world leaders responsible for a lot more violence than Trump such as Iran, China, are fine. Are they unaware of their inconsistency?

Twitter is a private company, that does not mean they can do whatever they want, private companies are subject to government regulations. The fact that the CEO of twitter and YouTube are allowed the power to single-handedly swing elections using shadowbans and algorithm suppression has got to be one of the most foolish decisions of recent American history. Such power should not belong to anyone.

[nutthrowaway277]

The only problem I have for banning him is they took so long doing it.  There has been many accounts created on both facebook and twitter that copied his tweets and posts word for word and were shut down wihin 24 hours for violating ToS and hate speech.  At this point it is closing the barn door after the horses have left, 100% to cover their butts from lawsuits and more importantly they don't want congress opening talks of regulating their platform more.

[obeysyed]

He's been problematic for a while on Twitter, he was speaking without thinking there are consequences.

Freedom of speech doesnt mean freedom to spread hatred.

[dac24]

I think its more of a problem that it took twitter so long to ban him. Being in gov office shouldnt give you a free pass, he should of been treated the same as everyone else

[abitoszmxvkvatmaqq]

doesnt everybody doing political communication have an ulterior motive?

---

i think the discussion around whether or not Trump shouldnt be banned isnt about if TRUMP shouldnt be banned, but rather about whether the US presi should be beholden to mercy of ANY company... in such direct manner

[Toober1]

Twitter should have done this a long time ago. When you say something on social media, you are responsible for saying it, but the social media is responsible for the message. As a social media, when someone says something on your platform, you are saying it. Automatic or not, it's your message, and you're liable for everything that is said. If Trump incites a riot on Twitter, Twitter is liable for that. They should and most likely will be sued for those messages, and it won't just be Twitter. Yes, Twitter was right to do that. No, it was not done at the right time. They were over 4 years late.

[monkeysontoast]

he had it coming tbh

[cockboy69]

It's about time. Nothing a lame duck president can do to harm twitter or any other tech behemoths now so it came at an expected time.

[poggersdudexc]

Should've gotten banned sooner lmao

[Cyberpvnk]

He should not of been banned. Really stupid.

[bleahz4]

What’s stopping him from creating another account? ?

[joachimlee]

Was awesome idea to me LOL

[Fulltonmour]

Twitter as a corporation has been looking for any reason to silence those who disagree with them and they saw this as a perfect opportunity. Now, make no mistake Twitter is not righteous for this, I mean for god sake those who actively call for the death of their political rivals is allowed by Twitter so long as that target disagrees with Twitter, and another thing Twitter does not in any way "fact" check or remove tweets from the Chinese government even when that same government actively brags on Titter about how successful their genocide is going.

[jamiejo]

Definitely sound like a good idea in theory but doesn't end well in reality

[spammingf]

Surely this is considered censorship

[elixsram]

F*** big tech