Nope. It should be reviewed by a human, and the response should be proportionate.

Why maddening? The active shooter response shouldn’t be all that different.

SEO garbage has been around for much more than a decade. In fact, before Google got really good at search ranking, sites easily gamed the search engines.

I click the links to the source on the relevant part.

*facetious

Maybe. For photographs, it’s definitely not unconstitutional to make it illegal, because people have a right to privacy (4th amendment sort of, and 10th because they’re state laws).

For Trump, and for non-photographic media, it’s a little different. For one, he’s a very public figure. Another, you could argue it’s artistic, satirical, or critical of him.

Now if you were doing it maliciously, with intent to harass him personally, then yeah that would probably be considered not protected and carry civil or criminal liability.

Yes, but that wording is misleading. Typical web discovery happens when a crawler finds a published link. It sounds like in this case, they’re just giving each and every share link to Google etc, even if the link is not posted anywhere public.