The problem is Facebook has become more than any other business in its influence over the young and individuals reality. Look at the personalised ads there to reinforce you’re own version of the world.
If it bans the likes of trump it should really ban all political parties and political discussion.
Then it could be used as it should be for your relatives to like cute pictures of your dog rather than rigg elections based on the agenda of the people who run it which seems to be the way it’s headed.

Social media companies do have a tricky difficult job because at the end of the day it all comes down to their bottom line, and that in part relies on a wider public perception.

They don't often act to the users betterment though. Especially Youtube and Facebook; they have done a number on people, walking them by the hand to ever drifting left and right bubbles (through their own algorithms), then blaming those same individuals for where they wind up from there's a hint of bad publicity.

All that matters to these services is 'engagement' and they achieve this by presenting people with more and more exaggerated and ludicrous version of what they already believe, most often geared towards anger rather than commonality, because it's the former that keeps eyeballs on screens.

Most people don't naturally find their way to Qanon or 'micro aggressions' type nuts views.. or having 97 different genders to choose from. Or having a mentality primarily revolves around their skin colour, getting drawn towards ideas that it's impossible to be racist against a white person, or that neo nazi 'patriot' groups are the answer. These are all fairground mirrors put in front of individuals who are easily manipulated and as result have found their way to a warped hinterland. Algorithms picked at shortcomings and turned them into their entire character. People grossly underestimate how much social media steers their direction of thought and their allegiances. I wouldn't say it was the intention of those at the helm to do this ( first and foremost they just want to be profitable), but it's clearly the consequence.

Edited by BlueJay (02 Jul 2021 3.13pm)

It's an good point in a excellent post.

I think one of the crossover points where left and right can agree is on centralised v decentralised power systems. We can see the tendency for power to be over centralised with a few elites. It's unavoidable to an extent with governments (which usually have their power constrained in other ways) but when it's unelected corporations all implementing the same policies the problems speak for themselves.

In the modern age these corporations have too much power.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Yes, they have more levers at their disposal; the ear of politicians, the connections, the finances to enact change and contort views.

Politicians know which side their bread is buttered too, so they're always leaning into whatever they can do for their mega rich mates no matter the morality of it. As consequence if you're an aspiring politician but can't be bought and aren't corrupt (or willing to turn a blind eye to it) don't expect a seat at the table.

Yes, considering the pro remain article he had written, my take is that he'd have much preferred a narrow loss for leave with the appearance of being a gallant 'man of the people', rather than the result and actually having to implement it.

You're welcome.