Hacker News Reader

Comment by tertius | Hacker News Reader

Does what it's supposed to do.

In your view, how so?

The businesses in question found it to be bad business to keep the president on their platform so they removed him. They aren’t being altruistic.

You seriously think that Twitter decided to ban Trump because they think they will make more money if they do?

Seems very unlikely to me. Trump draws massive traffic to Twitter.

Said business is cozying up to the party taking control of the house, senate, and presidency.

It has nothing to do with any market.

As they are free to do. The right tend to be the ones defending the rights of companies to do whatever they want, and it has bit them this time.

Yes, but companies don't normally do whatever they want... This action has nothing to do with free market economics.

Sure it does. They made this decision based on what they thought would be best for their company, by both satisfying advertisers and buying favor with the new administration. They balanced those benefits against the users they'll lose based on this decision and decided it was worth it.

Maybe we'll get lucky and find that they were wrong, and that this move causes enough public backlash to give other social networks a chance to thrive (if we're really lucky, maybe even decentralized ones!)

That's your guess.

The only information we have is that it was internal pressure too be a "better company."

Define bad business.

Get down to brass tacks so we can see if the argument holds up.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com