Thread by @JuddLegum

1. This detailed account of how Facebook reacted, as a company, to Trump's "when the looting starts, the shooting starts" pretty much tells you what you need to know about how the company operates

washingtonpost.com/technology/202…

2. First, Zuckerberg's deputies "contacted the White House" with "an urgent plea to tweak the language of the post or simply delete it"

This is a clear indication that THEY KNEW IT VIOLATED FACEBOOK'S RULES

3. Then, Trump calls Zuckerberg, and Zuckerberg says that his posts "put the company in a difficult position."

This is the type of thing you would say to a co-worker or teammate.

4. In response, Trump did not alter the post but "posted again, saying his comments were supposed to be a warning."

Zuckerberg then CITED TRUMP'S FOLLOWUP post in his announcement that it would be left up

The two are conspiring to create a narrative to justify the post

5. This isn't mentioned in the Post article but Trump, in an interview with Fox News, admitted that he posted "when the looting starts, the shooting starts," in part, as a threat

6. So Trump posts something that Facebook clearly knows violates its rules, Zuckerberg and Trump conspire to create a cover story, and Zuckerberg then uses it to justify his inaction.

Later, Trump admits the explanation was a lie.

7. This is the central problem with Facebook. It's less the rules themselves (although some rules are a problem) but there is not good faith enforcement of the rules.

It's a rigged game.

Advertisers are starting to wake up to this.

popular.info/p/update-faceb…