Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 454 posts

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#111

Post by at-fates-hands »

mabbo wrote: post #21

I'm torn. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression mean that the government can't put you in prison or punish you for saying or believing what you do. Facebook aren't the government, they're a private entity and don't have to host anything they don't like- including hosting photos that they don't like. It's a walled garden, and it's their walled garden, and if you don't like it you're welcome to leave. And on the…

>> they can't share with you, interact with you, etc, without you also being inside.

I hear this a lot and wonder what people did before social media, and before FB was around. It's the same thing. I closed my account probably 5 years ago and don't miss a thing. My friends are on FB, but I still know what's going because they use multiple platforms, we text and we still use email - so not having FB isn't a deal breaker.

The downside to this is people have lost the ability to effectively communicate with each other. If the only way you have to communicate with your friends and family is FB, then this is the onset of the decline of Western Civilization.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#112

Post by lloyd-christmas »

JabavuAdams wrote: post #22
maxxxxx wrote: post #2

I always find it interesting that no level of violence is deemed inappropriate in the US but nudity has to be avoided at any cost.

The image of nude and burning Phan Thi Kim Phuc appeared on the front page of the New York Times on June 9, 1972.

I'd be very curious to see what would happen if NYT had posted this.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#113

Post by ythl »

splawn wrote: post #92
ythl wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Debatable. Everyone loves to take credit for the invention of any revolutionary innovation. And indeed, credit can be spread all around. It's like Europe claiming sole credit for the invention of the PC because Alan Turing was British even though Americans invented the integrated circuit and actually built the first viable PCs.

First you make an absurd statement as absolute fact, but now its "debatable". It looks to me like you are backtracking. HTTP came out of CERN... what exactly is it you want to debate about?

It's not an absurd statement, it's the truth. Europe can't compete with American web tech (and probably even software in general). Think about it. In your day to day dealings with computers, what percentage of the software you use is American/European? I'm betting it's something like 99:1 (unless you try to make the claim the Linux is Finnish even though the majority of the developers for it are American and the creator himself is an American citizen). Compare to cars, which are more evenly split between countries (Japanese, European, American, etc.).

I'm not backtracking on that argument.

OP made a poor attempt to excuse Europe's lack of competitiveness in the software/web tech scene by waving their hands and saying "We invented all of it" (which is highly debatable). Claiming that Europe invented the web because HTTP came out of CERN and some European person envisioned a global network is bogus. Those are only tiny parts of what make up "the web". You conveniently sweep ARPANET, TCP/IP, and other core web technologies under the rug.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#114

Post by roadman »

I'm not on fb. I read in the comment from the spokeswoman that the distinction cannot be made by their robotic rules. So I believe this illustrates a limitation of their AI. And they don't care so much about the people than their algorithms. Just an opinion.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#115

Post by 794CD01 »

untog wrote: post #68
794CD01 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Encouraging your MP to violate human rights is only vacuously legal if it is at all.

What human rights are being violated in this scenario, exactly?

The comment I initially replied to asked for

>pass laws restricting what media organisations can or cannot do

in the context of mandating that they publish speech they disagree with.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#116

Post by galdosdi »

2close4comfort wrote: post #87
justsaysmthng wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is to close your account, block social media bugs and encourage your friends and family to do the same. Much easier said than done. First, there is no way to 'close' your account - you can only 'deactivate' it. I did it in July, but then I noticed that a lot of social activities - like concerts, festivals, parties, etc, are organised using Facebook so if you're not on it, you can't participate. This is very frustra…

You can delete it there are what only 5 datacenters...finding your data and cleansing it should not be too hard just alittle repetative ;) But the more effective way to make Facebook listen is to hit them in the pocketbook. Keep your account use an ad-blocker if enough people did that long enough...

They'll still profit from additional ad revenue when other people, like your friends and family, view your posts and use facebook longer than they would have because they are interested in you and your life.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#117

Post by pjc50 »

awinder wrote: post #88
red_admiral wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. It's more effective to lobby your local member of parliament/congress to pass laws restricting what media organisations can or cannot do. Granted, by "more effective" I mean something like 0.1% instead of 0.01%, but it's worth a try.

Why is Facebook a media outlet as opposed to, say, a private gathering place like a mall or movie theatre?

.. both of which are subject to different kinds of government regulation. But Facebook is definitely a medium. In some ways like a telecom or transit operator.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#118

Post by falcolas »

mabbo wrote: post #21

I'm torn. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression mean that the government can't put you in prison or punish you for saying or believing what you do. Facebook aren't the government, they're a private entity and don't have to host anything they don't like- including hosting photos that they don't like. It's a walled garden, and it's their walled garden, and if you don't like it you're welcome to leave. And on the…

It's worth noting that the freedom of expression is generally believed to apply more broadly than just to governments.

For example, from the UN Declaration of Universal Human Rights, Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

It's my opinion that Facebook is impeding on that right, and that it's going to come back to bite them at some point.

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#119

Post by kajecounterhack »

At Google certain images are considered EDSA (Educational, Documentary, Scientific or Artistic). I wonder if this would have been considered EDSA vs Facebook's decision to say it's against ToS.

That said, it totally makes sense that they have a consistent policy. Whether you find their overall abuse ToS objectionable should be the main consideration here. It's OK to me that they seem to have decided that imagery containing nude children should be hard-banned. It's a decision couched in the desire to protect children, not some heavy-handed censorship.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#120

Post by briandear »

red_admiral wrote: post #45
RodgerTheGreat wrote: post #28

If you're a Facebook user and you are unhappy with the way the company strongarms, censors and manipulates its audience, the most effective way for you to express this dissatisfaction is to close your account, block social media bugs and encourage your friends and family to do the same. Facebook doesn't care how you feel when you use their service; their bottom line simply depends on your contribution to the statisti…

No. It's more effective to lobby your local member of parliament/congress to pass laws restricting what media organisations can or cannot do. Granted, by "more effective" I mean something like 0.1% instead of 0.01%, but it's worth a try.

That's a very dangerous path on which to travel. China passes some strong laws what media organizations can and can't do. Free speech isn't a right given by governments, but one cultivated and protected by the people.

The marketplace solves these problems. Nobody is forced to use Facebook. If so many people care, perhaps they ought to vote with their dollar and seek alternatives. If they are unwilling to do that, it's on them and not the company that would support censorship.

Don't like tacos? Don't buy tacos. The government ought not tell taco vendors they can't sell tacos but instead reduce regulation to make it easier for a pizza guy to start a business. Less regulation by definition, increased freedom.

Post reply on HN