[wincy]

Same as it ever was. If you listen to interviews with Zuckerberg he’ll talk about the constant communiques from The White House during the Biden administration. Trump didn’t start this unfortunately he’s just more brazen about it.

[estearum]

Uhhh no. The White House (and other government agencies) have a well-established right to communicate with private entities. They do not have a right to coerce them. There's a blurry line between these, but not in Facebook's case, as they don't even claim they were coerced. Same with Twitter, whose lawyers testified under oath that Twitter's content moderation decisions were not coerced whatsoever.

Zuckerberg has specifically said they received requests from the government, they complied with some (as they have a right to do), declined others (as they have a right to do), none of which was under duress, and the response to non-compliance was expressions of "frustration" by the government officials.

By contrast, OpenAI's largest competitor just got kneecapped by the US government because they insisted that the US government comply with the contract terms the US government signed to literally months previously.

[iAMkenough]

Oh no! Biden sent an email to a company with a voluntary request?

That’s definitely as concerning as Trump taking bribes and then picking winners and losers in the market.

[meatmanek]

All you're saying is that the government under Biden talked to Meta.

[8note]

which of facebooks major products did Biden pull on a whim?

i dont remember whatsapp suddenly being turned off

[microgpt]

Tiktok?

[cake_robot]

That was via law passed by congress not executive fiat, which Trump's executive branch was illegally delaying until it was sold to a political ally.

[iAMkenough]

Still happened under Trump, they just forced TikTok to sell to a political ally.

[Arodex]

"Biden was horrible, terrible, very not good and I complain a lot about how he was the worst ever.

Trump is worse and I just "whatabout Biden" and leave it at that."