Rich Lowry
It is said that medieval scholastic philosophers debated how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
If so, they didn’t have anything on the amorphous and tendentious deliberations of Facebook regarding who is allowed to post on its social network, most pertinently the former president of the United States, Donald J. Trump.
On January 7, the day after the Capitol riot, Facebook blocked Trump from posting indefinitely. It then kicked the matter to its oversight board saying, “You decide.” On Wednesday, the board replied, “No, no – you decide.”
If Facebook had set out to demonstrate that it has awesome power over speech in the United States, including speech at the core of the nation’s political debate, and is wielding that power arbitrarily, indeed has no idea what its own rules truly are or should be, it wouldn’t have handled the question any differently.
Rich Lowry: Facebook’s speech policies are absurd
If Facebook just wanted to say that Trump is often noxious and dishonest in his social media postings, that d be understandable. But this would put it in the inherently subjective and highly contentious business of deciding which politicians are worthy and truthful, and which are not.
Read Article
Rich Lowry
It is said that medieval scholastic philosophers debated how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
If so, they didn’t have anything on the amorphous and tendentious deliberations of Facebook regarding who is allowed to post on its social network, most pertinently the former president of the United States, Donald J. Trump.
It is said that medieval scholastic philosophers debated how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
If so, they didnât have anything on the amorphous and tendentious deliberations of Facebook regarding who is allowed to post on its social network, most pertinently the former president of the United States, Donald J. Trump.
On January 7, the day after the Capitol riot, Facebook blocked Trump from posting indefinitely. It then kicked the matter to its oversight board saying, âYou decide.â On Wednesday, the board replied, âNo, no - you decide.â
If Facebook had set out to demonstrate that it has awesome power over speech in the United States, including speech at the core of the nationâs political debate, and is wielding that power arbitrarily, indeed has no idea what its own rules truly are or should be, it wouldnât have handled the question any differently.
POLITICO
Facebook’s Speech Policies Are Even More Arbitrary Than We Thought
The case of Facebook v. Trump is an open invitation to political actors to swoop in to reduce the social network’s power or write new rules for it
The Facebook logo is displayed at the 2018 CeBIT technology trade fair on June 12, 2018 in Hanover, Germany. | Alexander Koerner/Getty Images
By RICH LOWRY
Link Copied
and a contributing editor with Politico Magazine.
It is said that medieval scholastic philosophers debated how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
If so, they didn’t have anything on the amorphous and tendentious deliberations of Facebook regarding who is allowed to post on its social network, most pertinently the former president of the United States Donald J. Trump.
Thomas L Friedman column: Will Trump force principled conservatives to start their own party? I hope so baltimoresun.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from baltimoresun.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.