Asheen Phansey was fired on Thursday for a satirical Facebook post he made about President Donald Trump’s threat to bomb 52 sites “important to Iran & Iranian culture.”
While requests to remove threatening comments in defamation cases are not unheard of, this order stood out because it required the defendants to delete not only their own posts but also the comments made by third parties.
The new policy will ban “misleading information about when and how to participate in the census and the consequences of participating." Despite previous resistance to regulate them, the new policy will apply to advertisements bought by politicians.
According to the lawsuit, Nelson blocked Church after he questioned the accuracy of one of the senator’s online posts. After a tense back and forth, Church claims that Nelson deleted his comments and told him to either “mind his manners or go someplace else to post [his] propaganda.”
On November 20th, Google announced that the company will restrict how precisely political ads can target users on its search engine and on YouTube. Political ads can still be delivered according to gender, age, and location, as well according to the content of the website users visit. However, the new policy states that ads can’t be directed to users based on the public voter record or their political affiliations.
Should social media companies remove posts with the whistleblower's name to protect the person from harm? Facebook and Twitter have different answers.
Twitter announced on Wednesday, October 30th that his company would no longer accept political advertising on its platform. While notably more positive than Facebook's reception, Twitter's wasn’t universally warm.
By invoking the United State’s unique commitment to protecting free expression, Zuckerberg sought to draw attention towards the positive aspects of social media.