This is a place where I do not agree with Facebook's decision but I agree they have a right to decide who and what can be on their platform. Freedom of speech does not give me the right to come into your home and say whatever I like without being asked to leave. I'm free to do so in the public park across the street though. Your property rights trump my free speech.
Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
191–200 of 454 posts
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#192If 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…
Nobody will close their accounts.
Not having a FB account may be unwise: an impersonator might take your name, if only to make fun of you before his/her/your classmates.
Having an empty account, and actually not opening FB, may be a better way.
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
It may be "more effective" to implore the government to crack down on media policies you don't like, but it's also as much a threat to free expression as Facebook's ridiculous and overt censorship of this image.
Asking the government to protect freedom of speech is the exact opposite of a threat to free expression. It's analogous to congress passing a law saying that newspapers cannot edit letters to the editor. Some newspapers might complain about having to publish things they find disagreeable, but nobody is being censored anymore.
Imagine if a paper newspaper were told that they had to publish every letter sent to them or no letters at all. They would stop publishing letters entirely. There are a lot of ways to construct laws such that they have the opposite of their nominal effect. It's important to note that the US First Amendment bars the government from passing laws respecting both freedom of speech and freedom of the press (among other related rights).
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#194What was the PM's motivation to make the post in the first place?
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? We got a decent amount on Vietnam, though not so much in high school. I remember in middle school one of our teachers had us watch some of the actual newscasts, as well as exposing us to some other things like this picture. I'm 35 btw.
I'm 30, we definitely did. However, (I assume) both our parents were draft-age at the time of Vietnam. We also went to school during a time prior to the overly structured curriculum. Part of it may simply have been that the curriculum was generationally influenced.
I think my dad was a touch too young at the time, be was born in 1956 I think.
>We also went to school during a time prior to the overly structured curriculum.
This is probably why there's so much variation.
>Part of it may simply have been that the curriculum was generationally influenced.
This is probably a huge piece of why you and I got a lot on it. For many people that were teachers when I was young, this was a huge moment in US history, and warranted the attention.
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
It may be "more effective" to implore the government to crack down on media policies you don't like, but it's also as much a threat to free expression as Facebook's ridiculous and overt censorship of this image.
Free expression already has limits (No "Fire!" in a crowded theater when no danger exists), I'm absolutely fine with government saying what Facebook isn't allowed to do (remove journalistic posts without due process).
Yes free expression obviously does have limits; It probably doesn't have that silly "Fire in a theater" restriction.
Holmes (the supreme court justice you are quoting) said this with respect to this case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States where they prosecuted Schenck for anti-war pamphlets. This is something that would be protected by the constitution today. This quote is a pretty lousy excuse for suppressing free expression considering Holmes's track record of dismissing free speech.
With regards to Facebook removing posts, why should there be a "due process" for a (specific) company to remove posts. What sense does this make?
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it is becoming the predominant way people consume media. If it were only used by 10% of its current use, it shouldn't be, but it current levels it should. As Stalin said "quantity has a quality all its own".
Referencing Stalin in a media freedom context is, well, so liberal.
Stalin was quoting Napoleon. I'm not sure where you're going with this.
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
It may be "more effective" to implore the government to crack down on media policies you don't like, but it's also as much a threat to free expression as Facebook's ridiculous and overt censorship of this image.
Free expression already has limits (No "Fire!" in a crowded theater when no danger exists), I'm absolutely fine with government saying what Facebook isn't allowed to do (remove journalistic posts without due process).
[deleted]
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the article itself the PM gives Facebook credit for at least being consistent, w.r.t removing posts that contain that photo. So yes, it seems likely it was removed because of that picture. However, you probably want to think twice before removing a post by any PM. Having done so only fuels the fire, which arguably can be a good thing in this case.
I rather hopes she keeps putting it back up again. Then they can suspend her.
Yes.. I don't like her policies, but she has her good moments, and while I don't think they'll keep reposting it, as they'll have more important things to do, the Minister of Culture has also posted it and had her post taken down, and she has already indicated she very much wants to get Norwegian newspaper editors and Facebook together for a meeting. They'd not do that unless they're very displeased.
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#200If 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…
For many users, abandoning Facebook is like abandoning the web. So no matter what shit Facebook will pull they're not gonna leave, unless something better appears. From the other hand, this whole situation is a bit ludicrous. The journalist doesn't seem to understand how Facebook works and is directly attacking Zuckerberg like he explicitly asked to remove the picture. Come on guys, it's just an algorithm that detect…
TFA said it wasn't algorithmic, that it was a response of a review team at FB