By Tripp Mickle
With Donald Trump's return to Facebook in limbo, YouTube has
emerged as the former president's best chance to return to social
media in the near future.
Mr. Trump has been suspended from posting on the video-sharing
service owned by Alphabet Inc.'s Google since January. Company
leaders have said they will revisit their decision, but have given
few details on when, or who will make the call.
Unlike Facebook Inc. and Twitter Inc., which has permanently
banned Mr. Trump, YouTube has provided limited information on its
call. Facebook first explained its ban in a personal post by Chief
Executive Mark Zuckerberg and then referred the matter to its
independent Oversight Board. Twitter posted an explanation of its
decision and the rules it believed that Mr. Trump violated.
YouTube said in a short statement in January that Mr. Trump's
channel, which has almost 3 million subscribers, was suspended in
the wake of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot for violating the platform's
incitement-to-violence policy. The deadly riot by Mr. Trump's
supporters aimed to prevent Congress from certifying President
Biden's victory over Mr. Trump in the November election.
The video service has a three-strikes policy that governs
channel suspensions. A single strike, as it imposed on Mr. Trump's
channel, typically results in a one-week suspension. There is no
mention in YouTube's community guidelines of an indefinite
suspension as enacted in the former president's case.
A YouTube spokesman said Wednesday the service prolonged the
suspension because of the continuing risk of violence. YouTube's
terms of service give it flexibility to suspend or terminate an
account if there is the potential for harm, the spokesman said.
Mr. Trump has frequently criticized social-media companies'
power, saying they tend to suppress conservative views. He has
denied claims that he incited people to engage in destructive
behavior at the Capitol. In a statement Wednesday, he said, "What
Facebook, Twitter, and Google have done is a total disgrace and an
embarrassment to our Country." The companies have rejected
allegations their platforms show bias in handling political
YouTube Chief Executive Susan Wojcicki spoke publicly about the
suspension in early March, saying that a recent warning from
Capitol Police about a potential attack showed that Mr. Trump's
channel still posed a risk of inciting violence. She said YouTube
would lift the suspension when it determines the violence risk has
"It's hard for me to say when that's going to be, but it's
pretty clear right now where we stand," Ms. Wojcicki said during a
virtual event hosted by the Atlantic Council, a think tank.
A YouTube spokesman declined to say who would determine when Mr.
Trump's account would be restored, adding that internal trust and
safety teams would continue to evaluate social-media posts,
government security alerts and law-enforcement activity.
Ms. Wojcicki, as well as Google Chief Executive Sundar Pichai
and Chief Legal Officer Kent Walker typically weigh in on decisions
about YouTube suspensions of high-profile figures such as Mr.
Trump, people familiar with the review process said.
The company has avoided detailing employees who are part of its
content-review process for safety reasons, these people said. In
2018, a woman armed with a handgun opened fire at YouTube's
headquarters wounding three people and shooting herself months
after posting a video where she accused the service of limiting
viewer traffic to her content.
YouTube and Ms. Wojcicki, similar to other social-media
companies and executives, have fielded criticism from users and
lawmakers over content-moderation rules. Free-speech advocates,
including those critical of Mr. Trump, have called on YouTube to be
more transparent about its rationale for the suspension of the
former president and its appeals process.
Kate Ruane, the American Civil Liberties Union's senior
legislative counsel, said that YouTube's power to freeze the
then-president's account while providing little insight into how or
when it might lift the suspension affects the two billion people
who use the service each month.
"Any of the big platforms that are operating as gateways to the
online public square should be providing the same level of clarity,
transparency, consistency and due process as whoever is sitting
next to them in a Congressional hearing," Ms. Ruane said.
The largest U.S.-based social-media companies have typically
moved in lockstep on many content issues. After the U.S. Capitol
riot, they diverged on how to deal with Mr. Trump.
Snapchat parent Snap Inc. became the first major platform to
announce a permanent ban of Mr. Trump on Jan. 6. At that time,
Facebook and Twitter had both locked Mr. Trump's accounts, but
hadn't yet said whether the moves would be permanent.
A Snap spokeswoman said that the company locked Mr. Trump's
account indefinitely because it "will not amplify voices who incite
racial violence and injustice."
Shortly after, Twitter said it had banned Mr. Trump permanently.
Facebook suspended Mr. Trump, and later referred the matter to its
Oversight Board, an independent panel that can adjudicate the
company's thorniest content issues. YouTube followed with its
The introduction of Facebook's Oversight Board could force its
peers to reassess how they deal with content-moderation disputes,
Ms. Ruane said. Facebook's own oversight board Wednesday criticized
the company's lack of transparency over its indefinite suspension
of Mr. Trump's accounts.
Georgia Wells contributed to this article.
Write to Tripp Mickle at Tripp.Mickle@wsj.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
May 06, 2021 05:44 ET (09:44 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2021 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Historical Stock Chart
From Jul 2021 to Aug 2021
Historical Stock Chart
From Aug 2020 to Aug 2021