Own instances give a lot more control. They can be as outrageous as they like, full on Trumpian, even. They can also control what gets said in that space much more effectively, seeing as how they are the mods and admins. And they don't have to worry about Meta or Reddit (I doubt Musk even cares) getting media backlash and removing them from the platform entirely.

Sure, Threads can defed from any controversial instances but it will be trivial to create a mirror that effectively refederates the problem instance.

[–] Neato@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The same reason Trump has his own social network.

Didn't that only start when he was threatened for being kicked off Twitter?

But the other points for censoring ideas make sense.

[–] 520@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Didn't that only start when he was threatened for being kicked off Twitter?

Exactly. No one is gonna kick you off your own platform, or in fediverse terms, your own instance. The most others can do is defed from you, but that's easy enough to get around if you're determined.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Trump being deplatformed, while having good reason, could have likely concerned cabinets and governments worldwide that they may as well "just in case". Also, having something like "10downingstreet@social.gov.uk" or "potus@social.whitehouse.gov" seems more legit then "10downingstreet@threads.net" or "potus@threads.net". It's a similar idea why they don't use gmail/outlook addresses

Keep in mind, I'm talking governments and media organisations. They could likely just ask an intern to do it for them lmao. The benefits outweigh the cost. Even plenty of tech nerds have personal instances.