Probably the same stick all admins have: the threat of letting the DOJ pursue anti-monopolistic behavior. If they "behave" the DOJ lets them continue in their ways. If they don't they allow the possibility of getting the giants split up.
No, compelled speech falls under free speech. You can kick people off a platform because you disagree with them. They can even demonetize people for perfectly legal activities.
So, legally YouTube is fine, politically things are different.
Precisely, these platforms are settling specifically because this president openly looks to punish and hold grudges and have vendettas against whom he sees, and describes, as his enemies.
This is a matter of Google saying "he can do more than $25M of damage to us if we keep fighting this".
You mean the one in which there were 275 federal agents - some of which who were extremely fit and masked people who broke open windows, urging people to get in. Also hit and shoved away the unmasked protestors who asked them what the hell they were doing ?
"caves" is an odd word choice. The platform banned the president of the united states, libeling him in the process, which feels like a pretty big and harmful deal. I don't want big tech regulating which politicians we're allowed to know about, and I would imagine most people would agree whether it's about a Republican or Democrat.
Many people have difficulty understanding the difference between a belief and a fact. I.e, you are talking about a belief but talking like it is a fact.
How do you feel about Google's settlement being a donation to a Trust that's building the "Trump Ballroom"? Helpfully, Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law, has formed a company that handles construction management for event spaces...
I wonder what they are being threatened with behind closed doors. Google has the money to fight this lawsuit.
Probably the same stick all admins have: the threat of letting the DOJ pursue anti-monopolistic behavior. If they "behave" the DOJ lets them continue in their ways. If they don't they allow the possibility of getting the giants split up.
I think op means, I wonder what it means to "behave" in this context. I wonder what is actually being pursued?
Money going to a ballroom…
In unexpected news Larry E. and Jared K. have just announced the formation of a ballroom building company.
Who saw that coming?
Weak as water
"Caves" is doing heavy lifting work here. Censoring a president should come with repercussions.
No, compelled speech falls under free speech. You can kick people off a platform because you disagree with them. They can even demonetize people for perfectly legal activities.
So, legally YouTube is fine, politically things are different.
Precisely, these platforms are settling specifically because this president openly looks to punish and hold grudges and have vendettas against whom he sees, and describes, as his enemies.
This is a matter of Google saying "he can do more than $25M of damage to us if we keep fighting this".
Kick rocks. Pres. Bonespurs was a civi at the time and a full-on pos that deserved to be kicked off.
Not when that president incites a terrorist attack against the US government...
You mean the one in which there were 275 federal agents - some of which who were extremely fit and masked people who broke open windows, urging people to get in. Also hit and shoved away the unmasked protestors who asked them what the hell they were doing ?
You're saying Trump was voted out so the FBI(?) tried to stop the count. And then the Biden DOJ decided not to prosecute them?
Seems plausible.
"caves" is an odd word choice. The platform banned the president of the united states, libeling him in the process, which feels like a pretty big and harmful deal. I don't want big tech regulating which politicians we're allowed to know about, and I would imagine most people would agree whether it's about a Republican or Democrat.
In the US, it's not libel if it's true.
Average politician hasn't tried to steal an election though
Many people have difficulty understanding the difference between a belief and a fact. I.e, you are talking about a belief but talking like it is a fact.
Sorry, what exactly is "not a fact" about it?
Knowing about and having to hear his lies are two diff things.
How do you feel about Google's settlement being a donation to a Trust that's building the "Trump Ballroom"? Helpfully, Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law, has formed a company that handles construction management for event spaces...