Menu
An+incitement+to+violence+or+free+speech%3F+Students+debate+validity+%26+ethics+of+social+media+ban+on+Trump

Photo courtesy of Darren Halstead/Unsplash

An incitement to violence or free speech? Students debate validity & ethics of social media ban on Trump

In the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021, violent protest in the Capitol, many social media platforms such as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook banned President Donald Trump on claims that his public social media posts fanned the flames of insurrection. But what happens when the power of social media platforms clash with the power of an American president?

By Staff Report

The Wessex Wire created this package with the help of history teacher Beth Vaknin and more than 70 students enrolled in her AP Government classes. Below is a sampling of multifaceted student perspectives on the legality — and morality — of social media account restrictions that platforms placed on President Donald Trump in January 2021. Each voice is different, but the below essays are broadly sorted into three categories:

GREEN: Bans are good to GO

YELLOW: Bans should proceed with CAUTION

RED: Bans should STOP

Lack of moderation leads to violence

When lives are at risk at the hands of the president’s words, why shouldn’t he be banned from the outlets that allow him to incite violence? By Parisa Wendell

Social media has the right to censor people, but they do so unequally

The issue I take with the decision, and the reaction of both parties, is Twitter’s inequality in applying its rules. By Dean Troiano

Trump did not breach Twitter’s terms of service

Trump did not incite the riot, it was the people at the capitol who took it into their own hands. By Kevin Klukowitz

Trump’s actions caused his own ban

Trump’s responsibility for the violence was Twitter’s reasoning behind the ban, which I support. By Taylor Sindle

Presidents’ social media use should be monitored

I think that the president should be monitored by a social media manager to check what they are posting and how people will respond to it. By Ava Evangelista

Social media sites should not wield so much power

Banning the president sets a dangerous precedent that people can be banned for expressing their personal and political beliefs. By Eric Antonian

POTUS is not above the terms of service

Just because Trump was the president doesn't mean he should be an exception to the rules. By Josh Ivler

Since social media sites banned Trump, others should be banned as well

If the company is going to, as it should, stand for banning those who incite violence on its platform in such conversations, is it really so moral to only eliminate one user, not all? By Lauren Bohrer

While it’s legal, the ban is an attack on free speech

Censoring the president is simply un-american and shows just how big big-tech really is. By Abigail Boggier

Social media sites are their own private companies

Social media websites should be able to ban the President because they are private companies and are not run by the government. By Abby Haza

The President can be banned, but shouldn’t be

I do understand obviously why these platforms would ban him because of the questionable things he says, but I do not think it is worthy to take away his entire social media and disallow the people who care about what he has to say to hear him. By Jack Montalto

Just because Trump is unpopular, doesn’t mean he should be banned

The left blamed Trump for inciting the January 6 attack by twisting his words and misinterpreting his tweets. By Jack Ruane

The Wessex Wire • Copyright 2024 • FLEX WordPress Theme by SNO • Log in