Oversight Board upholds Facebook ban on former president

The Facebook Oversight Board today upheld Facebook’s “indefinite” ban of former US president T****. But they also ruled that an indefinite ban was too vague and that within six months, FB must either make the ban permanent, as Twitter and Snapchat have, or make it for a specified amount of time.

Talk about a no-brainer for FB. T****’s Instigation and launch of the January 6 attack on the US Capitol was, at the very least, sedition. FB should make sure it never again provides a platform for such activity.

T**** has launched his own blog and is free to post his authoritarian lies and fantasies there. At least as long as the law lets him. But don’t go looking for it. Your searches and hits will just inflate his numbers (and ego) and encourage him.

Sedition is a serious felony punishable by fines and up to 20 years in prison and it refers to the act of inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority with the goal of destroying or overthrowing it.


8 thoughts on “Oversight Board upholds Facebook ban on former president

  1. It’s a private company (one with strong political leanings and but whatever). They can censor/choose their side if they wish, but in all fairness and realistically should note it on every page. Some of the stuff from Maxine Waters, Pelosi, Sheila JL, and some noted activists get pretty close to the same line. At least they finally made Farrakhan and Rev. Wright moderate some too.
    Fakebook is what it is. People should realize the algorithm tracks and sends more and more focused info to them once it figures out what is being read …narrowing down what people read/exposed to rather than seeing a broad range of concepts, view points and ideas. Repeatedly seeing the same narrowing view is not healthy for anyone or for any side. Easy to get distorted view if that’s the only source of news/information. People our age read/explore widely – a worry that the younger generations are so dependent on one source and that they don’t realize that source could be manipulating.
    I am so tired of FB and both Trump haters and adorers…please, DC and politicians – can you just stop looking back and stop jumping ahead and simply focus on the months and weeks right in front of you for a bit? For want of a timely nail, the shoe was lost.
    Oh, wait. Silly me. They aren’t there to do the job they were sent to do – only to do what will get them elected again.

    1. Critical thinking is becoming a lost art; too many people get all their news from one source, and too many people think Facebook is a news source.

      You’re right about the politicians. They run hard to get elected, and then spend all their time working to get re-elected.

  2. I am going to be controversial for a minute now. As someone who lives outside of the US and someone who no longer uses Facebook because it uses my personal data without my permission and saves it in perpetuity. I would just like to say that I don’t think it is right that a private company should muzzle a private persons right to free speech in the 21st century. After all Trump is back to being a private citizen again. There are many world leaders who deserve to be banned from all social media using the same criteria which was used against President Trump. However they are free to use their social media accounts with no restraint. There is a battle on at the moment to curtail freedoms around the world and the internet is the latest bastion of free speech to be censored by a small minority who wish to control the narrative. There, that was my little piece of free speech done with. Now carry on.

    1. Facebook is a private company but is publicly traded. It is subject to federal laws and penalties regarding its content. Just as freedom of speech does not allow you to yell “fire” in a crowded theater, so does it not allow obscenity, seditious or treasonous speech, etc. If Facebook did not police themselves, they’d be subject to penalties, lawsuits, etc. They are not blocking the internet; they are policing their own members. As a private citizen, Trump is free to start and has started his own blog. I can’t speak for other countries and their management of the internet within their borders, except for China. It’s my understanding that it has complete government control over what does and does not appear on the internet within its borders.

  3. Thanks for the clarification, concise as ever. Very varied and interesting site you have. I would argue about Trump encouraging sedition over there but that’s ancient history now. Looking forward all the best.

    1. It all hinges on whether Facebook is considered a publisher or a social media platform. They fall somewhere in between, and our laws haven’t quite kept up with the latest technology. In any case, glad you enjoy this blog, and thank you.

... and that's my two cents