This is the most rational post so far about Trump’s suspension from Twitter and Facebook. What will it ultimately mean?
The worry is that the precedent set by Twitter will (unless overturned by the courts) result in a censorship regime in which a tiny minority of users are disadvantaged, essentially to show that the market can successfully discipline democracy.
David Timoney finds Trump’s supension odd. Indeed it is.
The suspension of Donald Trump from Twitter has been welcomed by many who believe that social media promotes echo chambers and disinformation. This strikes me as odd because Trump was clearly followed by people of all political persuasions, including opponents who derisively retweeted him. Short of blocking his account and muting the very mention of his name, it wasn’t possible to preserve your “filter bubble” from his yawping. He sought to expand his reach rather than limit it to the select few, and I can’t help wondering if he sometimes exaggerated the madness to this end. Contrary to his characterisation as a political exception, his strategy was a conventional one of both reinforcing his base and trying to attract additional supporters. He may be a racist but he was happy to welcome black and latinx voters to his camp. Similarly, his attempts at disinformation prompted broad and detailed pushback, not to mention ridicule. The actual echo chambers within which conspiracy theories are shared and plots hatched are to be found on private platforms, like WhatsApp and Telegram, not essentially public platforms like Twitter and Facebook. So why is there now a political focus on the latter?
Read the full post here.
On a lighter note, here is what we are missing. Some of his very best tweets.