http://gizmodo.com/facebook-employees-asked-mark-zuckerberg-if-they-should-1771012990
>Every week, Facebook employees vote in an internal poll on what they want to ask Zuckerberg in an upcoming Q&A session. A question from the March 4 poll was: “What responsibility does Facebook have to help prevent President Trump in 2017?”
>“Facebook can promote or block any material that it wants,” UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh told Gizmodo. “Facebook has the same First Amendment right as the New York Times. They can completely block Trump if they want. They block him or promote him.” But the New York Times isn’t hosting pages like Donald Trump for President or Donald Trump for President 2016, the way Facebook is.
>If Facebook decided to, it could gradually remove any pro-Trump stories or media off its site—devastating for a campaign that runs on memes and publicity. Facebook wouldn’t have to disclose it was doing this, and would be protected by the First Amendment.
>The only way that Facebook could legally overstep, experts say, is by colluding with a given candidate. “If Facebook was actively coordinating with the Sanders or Clinton campaign, and suppressing Donald Trump news, it would turn an independent expenditure (protected by the First Amendment) into a campaign contribution because it would be coordinated—and that could be restricted,” Volokh said.
http://pastebin.com/N4VQWhj7
CAN'T STUMP THE TRUMP!
They are a private business, so they could if they wanted. Hopefully the free market would handle it.
But why do liberals hate free speech so much?
>Donald Trump is a dangerous fascist.
>Which is why it's ok for us to use fascist means to suppress him.
"Stop Trump if you don't mind training a paki to do your job, stupid fucks" Zuckerberg replied.
>>71051949
> it ain't easy being a tyrant.
Mark zuckerberg has too much jewish privelige
>>71050289
>The only way that Facebook could legally overstep, experts say, is by colluding with a given candidate.
They'll do it too.
>If Facebook decided to, it could gradually remove any pro-Trump stories or media off its site—devastating for a campaign that runs on memes and publicity.
They fear us. They fear our power, and what our terrible magic has wrought upon them. Rejoice, brothers! The hour of deliverance is at hand!
If they did something like that they would set a dangerous precedent.
These tech companies have way too much power.
>>71050289
Says a lot about the type of employees kikebook hires for this to even be a question.
>>71051949
Because their ideas can't compete in a free market of ideas. They can only exist and flourish when their competition is artificially suppressed
>>71054545
https://wikileaks.org/google-is-not-what-it-seems/
They're becoming civilian departments of the CIA, able to go where they can't, without the government having to disclose it, without borders.
If anyone here works in the tech field, why are so many admins, coders, game developers, computer graphic designers, etc such raging nu-male cucks? You guys went from slovenly Unix beards to hardcore progressive and trendy cuckolds. It doesn't matter if they work in a start up or a massive corporation like Microsoft, they are all the same.
>>71054777
Google is not as cucked as the other tech giants. Alternative Holocaust history is 100% allowed and uncensored on YouTube.
>>71054777
Also Wikileaks has a leftist bias.
>>71051949
The entire point of that post is that FB is using free speech.
In the reverse situation, just because you run a newspaper, does not mean you have to print pro cuck pieces. Nor would you be hindering free speech.
>>71054867
They are known as "sneaker fuckers" in the animal kingdom. Their beta male status makes them subconciously adopt this strategy to attract females since they have no other means. Even if the female doesn't want it the sneaker fucker just bouncea to the next one until it finds a beta female.
