Meta Claims it’s Not Political as Mark Zuckerberg FlipFlops on Trump
Meta's decision to reinstate Trump's social media accounts has sparked controversy and raised questions about its political content policies. l Source: Scott Olson/Getty Images
Key Takeaways
- Meta lifted restrictions on former President Donald Trump’s social media accounts, raising questions about its stance on political content.
- This decision comes amidst heightened political tension, including an assassination attempt on Trump and his threat to imprison Mark Zuckerberg if re-elected.
- The relationship between social media platforms and political entities has been scrutinized by regulators.
Meta’s decision to reinstate Donald Trump’s social media accounts has ignited widespread controversy and raised questions about the company’s approach to political content. The company behind Facebook and Instagram defended the decision as a step towards achieving political balance with President Joe Biden.
However, this move arrives amid heightened political tension, exacerbated by Trump‘s recent assassination attempt at a rally and his public statement threatening to arrest Mark Zuckerberg if elected
Meta Lifts Trump’s Accounts Suspension
Meta, the company overseeing Facebook, Instagram, Threads, and WhatsApp, lifted longstanding restrictions on former US President Donald Trump’s accounts on Friday, July 12, 2024. Trump, now the Republican Party’s candidate in the upcoming presidential elections, had previously been readmitted to these platforms but under strict monitoring.
Meta indicated that if Trump resumed promoting views that had led to his initial ban – such as questioning the legitimacy of the 2020 election – the accounts could face renewed suspension ranging from one month to two years.
As of Friday last week, this monitoring has been discontinued. Meta’s president, Nick Clegg, stated that Trump’s suspension had been a response to “extreme and exceptional circumstances,” and with Trump re-entering the presidential race, Meta believes in providing equal access to both candidates for the American people. Clegg emphasized that all candidates must still adhere to platform regulations.
Trump had been barred indefinitely from these social networks following accusations of using them to incite his supporters during the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol. For over a year, Trump lacked a means to communicate via major social media platforms, including YouTube.
Controversies On Zuckerberg’s Political Moves
Since the beginning of his adventure as the founder and leader of Facebook, then turned into Meta, Mark Zuckerberg has been at the centre of attention about his relationship with political parties and candidates. Despite he’s never said if he supports Republicans or Democrats, Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, have donated at least $159,600 to federal candidates and committees.
Of Zuckerberg’s $41,200 direct contributions to candidates and party committees since 2012, 62% went to Democrats. Chan has given $21,000 to Democratic candidates and committees since 2014. In 2022, they each donated $5,000 to Meta’s PAC, their sole contributions that cycle.
In 2021, Chan’s largest donation of $750,000 went to a group opposing California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s recall. Zuckerberg’s largest-ever contribution of $1 million supported a successful FWD.us California ballot measure in 2016. Since 2016, Meta employees and its PAC have heavily favored Democrats, but the PAC leans conservative, giving slightly more to Republicans since 2012. In 2022, the Meta PAC contributed $289,900, with 53% going to Republicans.
After the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot, Meta paused its PAC’s contributions, later resuming with a policy not to support legislators who opposed certifying the 2020 election results. Meta has also spent $11.7 million on State-level lobbying across 19 States since 2010 and $4.5 million on state-level contributions since 2010, much more more than Tesla’s $965,234 and SpaceX’s $47,950.
Relationship Between Social Media And Politics
According to a Pew Research Center survey , a majority of Americans believe social media companies have too much power and influence in politics, and about half think major tech companies need more regulation. This sentiment arises as four major tech executives prepare to testify before Congress about their firms’ economic and societal roles.
The survey found that 72% of US adults think social media companies wield too much political power, while only 21% believe their influence is appropriate, and 6% feel it is insufficient.
Both Republicans and Democrats generally agree on the excessive power of social media companies, though Republicans are particularly vocal. Approximately 82% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say these companies have too much political influence, compared to 63% of Democrats and Democratic leaners. Conversely, Democrats are more likely than Republicans to believe the power of these companies is about right – 28% vs. 13%. Few from either party think these companies lack sufficient power.
Global legislative efforts have repeatedly aimed to curb the influence of social media platforms. Examples include the US Congress’ scrutiny of Meta’s privacy rules, the pressure on ByteDance to sell TikTok to a US entity, and a recent controversy involving Elon Musk. Musk claimed that the European Commission offered X – formerly Twitter – “an illegal deal” to avoid fines by secretly censoring speech, a deal allegedly accepted by other platforms but rejected by X.
Trump-Linked Memecoins Surge After Failed Attack – What’s Next for $MAGA and Others?
