You know, it would be pretty funny if Twitter banned Trump's account because of some TOS terms have or something. If he actually causes them enough problems over this such that they are already paying for it, it might be worth it as a power play on their part.
Trump definitely depends on Twitter far more than Twitter depends on Trump. He could move to Facebook/Instagram, but I just don't see that being a move he would want to do, partly because the type of communication doesn't seem to be the same, and partly because it would be a huge admission of defeat, where he couldn't bully a person or company into doing what he wanted.
Twitter would likely see a big dip in usage, at least for a short period, as some Trump loyalists boycotted it, but I imagine a lot of them would be back. There's also the rights of a private companies to control their own service which is a traditional Republican belief, but I doubt that would matter much, as the current political climate doesn't seem conducive to politicians adhering to past beliefs, not matter whcih side of the divide they are on.
Not if he's threatening their business, and I think you overestimate how much Trump brings to Twitter. I'm sure he drives a level and engagement and discourse, but that's still going to be there to a large degree even if his account isn't. It's not like people aren't posting news clips about him from other websites all the time.
Trump is one of many thousands of popular people driving engagement on Twitter, even if he's high up on the list (but he doesn't have the most followers, he's not even in the top 5 apparently.[1]) On the other hand, Twitter is the one preferred platform for Trump to speak to his followers. Press briefings and official statements are a distant second. The fact that he announced his official plans to counterattack Twitter on Twitter first says it all.
> Twitter is the one preferred platform for Trump to speak to his followers
Funny you mention that, Trump doesn't realize the real power he has to help solve his own problem AND benefit the rest of us, is by lending his voice to a different platform. If, like me, you believe the solution to the stranglehold that the current social cartel has had for the past decade is to build new, competing platforms, and encourage their growth, then it's easy to see how getting Trump to use a different site would be beneficial, regardless of what he's spewing.
> If, like me, you believe the solution to the stranglehold that the current social cartel has had for the past decade is to build new, competing platforms, and encourage their growth
I think that's half of it. The other is a lot of time. It seems pretty clear to me that different age groups use social media in different ways, and I'm not sure it's a behavior that stays with the cohort as it ages, or is associated with that age itself.
My teenage children use whatever social network they feel like and don't really care for Facebook or Twitter. Does that change as they get older, or does it mean that in 10-20 years those companies will be less relevant (unless they buy the up-and-comers, like Facebook did with Instagram)?
I think Trump definitely has the ability to put that to the test though, and that you're right in that he's got a lot of pull to cause at least a short term shift based on the narrative he expresses.
This came up when the "fact check badge" was discussed here yesterday.
I fully agree. Ban the president for literally no other reason than the lulz. Just to troll him. But then they did the typical limp dick liberal thing and tried to to high-road a troll, once again giving the troll the upper hand.
You can't high-road a troll. Now they're stuck in a position of having to maintain their haughty better-than-thou "white knights of facts" position for as long as they can, all while being attacked from every angle. Every time they try to position themselves as knowing better, the facade cracks a bit. They'll be dealing with baseless accusations, but each one will still push the point that maybe they don't know what they're doing. That maybe it was a bad idea.
When dealing with a troll, just say you did because you felt like it and leave it at that. If someone calls you dumb, double down. You wanted to, so you did. No regrets.
Seriously, people (liberal especially) have no understanding of trolls whatsoever and it's a massive unpatched security threat to the country.
Trump definitely depends on Twitter far more than Twitter depends on Trump. He could move to Facebook/Instagram, but I just don't see that being a move he would want to do, partly because the type of communication doesn't seem to be the same, and partly because it would be a huge admission of defeat, where he couldn't bully a person or company into doing what he wanted.
Twitter would likely see a big dip in usage, at least for a short period, as some Trump loyalists boycotted it, but I imagine a lot of them would be back. There's also the rights of a private companies to control their own service which is a traditional Republican belief, but I doubt that would matter much, as the current political climate doesn't seem conducive to politicians adhering to past beliefs, not matter whcih side of the divide they are on.