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

Facebook is imposing American censorship on the rest of the world

telegraph.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 348 posts

Re: Facebook is imposing American censorship on the rest of the world

#101

Post by John23832 »

saint_fiasco wrote: post #60
John23832 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people often forget the other side of the coin. These companies "cross-pollenate" American morality across the world because they are American companies. Based in America. On American soil. Responsible to America's laws. To ask that these companies not spread American morality (or French morality if they were based in France, or German etc.) is to ask that they not be made to operate under the laws of the cou…

Morality is not the same as legality.

Legality is group morality codified.

Re: Facebook is imposing American censorship on the rest of the world

#102

Post by dark12222000 »

joshuaheard wrote: post #11

Maybe it's time to consider Facebook, Twitter, et al, as common carriers, which, under the new net neutrality law, would disallow them from censoring content. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_carrier#Telecommunicati...

They could potentially have this... if they didn't filter or limit content at all (Safe Harbor) but Facebook (and Twitter) have explicitly chosen to do otherwise. They want to control what content is posted to them, very much so.

Facebook (and Twitter) want to have a particular narrative, and one that's ultimately to make their advertisers happier. If you don't agree with that (and, imho, you should take issue with that) then choose an actually free platform. One controlled by an American for-profit company will never be a truly free platform.

Re: Facebook is imposing American censorship on the rest of the world

#103

Post by larsiusprime »

kinkdr wrote: post #85

Lots and lots of people seem to forget: Facebook is an American COMPANY. It is not a utility, it is not a non-profit organization. People choose to use it, and hence they have to put up with their rules. If they don't like it, they should stop using it and start using the open alternatives.

The problem with this view of free speech is that the means of communication are privately owned: http://www.jonas-kyratzes.net/2014/04/26/free-speech-and-the...

Re: Facebook is imposing American censorship on the rest of the world

#104

Post by tomjen3 »

mgleason_3 wrote: post #54

Americans are so bought into the idea that "explicit" images are bad that they can't see another viewpoint. Its become "natural". And, as the author pointed out, Americans are so blind to it that you don't even see the problem with censoring nipples but not beheadings. We literally cant see that noone should be injured by seeing a womans breast, but seeing a beheaded body - thats OK? Its interesting to see this story…

There really isn't a problem with seeing beheadings either. I was obsessed with seeing just how evil IS were (spoiler: nazi level) so for a time I watched all the videos the press talked about. Some of them did make me feel bad, but none of them harmed me.

Re: Facebook is imposing American censorship on the rest of the world

#105

Post by chippy »

In writing some replies to a couple of comments, I think that the article is referring to cultural privilege. Americans have the privilege as being the most powerful western culture, Facebook comes from an educated, technological, rich, American, culture and cannot see others that with less power should have some of influence in how a global culture can be. Also, as with most forms of privilege it's not common at all that those at the top need to compromise with those below and characteristic is that those with the most priviledge cannot see their own position at the top and inability to acknowledge their issues of others.

What the article is showing is the privilege of American culture interacting with other cultures and peoples.

edits: I think it's actually a great time for the Internet - I am seeing this as the growing pains of a new global culture - a new global way of looking at the world. We are seeing the makers and police of the rich west seeing that the world is more complex and diverse than they are comfortable with, and the result will be interesting to say the least, and glorious and rich if all cultures can be supported in a global way.

Re: Facebook is imposing American censorship on the rest of the world

#106

Post by fit2rule »

r_smart wrote: post #92
mgleason_3 wrote: post #54

Americans are so bought into the idea that "explicit" images are bad that they can't see another viewpoint. Its become "natural". And, as the author pointed out, Americans are so blind to it that you don't even see the problem with censoring nipples but not beheadings. We literally cant see that noone should be injured by seeing a womans breast, but seeing a beheaded body - thats OK? Its interesting to see this story…

America has something like 330 million people in it. I assure you, there are a lot of us who see the basic logic around this and think we should stop worrying about the occasional nipple. In this particular instance though, it's worse than your complaint. We're talking about censoring an iconic image captured from an important time in our history. I'd be willing to bet that even among the anti-nipple people, this ima…

>I assure you, there are a lot of us who see the basic logic around this and think we should stop worrying about the occasional nipple.

I think the basic problem here is not that there aren't Americans who don't have a problem with seeing a bit of nipple, but that a majority of Americans don't seem to understand that if you censor this kind of thing from people, it makes them a lot more reactive to it when they do in fact encounter it - that is to say, by removing from society any acceptance of sex as a positive thing, American society has become far more malleable and reactive to sex - and thus can be sold more things using sex - than it should be.

Sex wouldn't be a billion-dollar industry if nobody was bothered by seeing it now and then.

The same position, by the way, can be taken with regard to the way Americans view their wars. The average American has no clue what it actually means to let their military-industrial complex run rampant across the globe - because they don't see the images, the video, the very real facts of the matter, on the ground. And thus, those who profit from such acts, profit.

Re: Facebook is imposing American censorship on the rest of the world

#107

Post by tehwalrus »

chippy wrote: post #76
tehwalrus wrote: post #27

It hurts my brain when people describe censorship as "liberalism". Especially fellow Brits.

Agreed. It's not Liberalism at all - if anything, from the article, thinking about this on a global scale - it's a cross between a Silicon Valley tech mindset, American puritanism, and the current flavour of rich, white, university educated politically correct behaviour. In short it means an odd mixture of whats allowed and not which the article talks about, but it's nothing to do with liberalism. edits: I think it's…

Sorry, I can't allow the context to make it seem as if I approve of being deliberately thoughtless. I generally try hard myself not to be incorrect (politically) since it would break one of Bill and Ted's two commandments.

I just dislike it when Liberalism, which I believe in whole-heartedly pretty much exactly as I think Mill intended, is dragged into this debate about censorship, when it was about what should be illegal not what was moral or immoral. (Indeed, it is a way for people who disagree with each other about what is immoral to live in the same country under the same law and feel safe.)

Re: Facebook is imposing American censorship on the rest of the world

#108

Post by weberc2 »

r_smart wrote: post #92
mgleason_3 wrote: post #54

Americans are so bought into the idea that "explicit" images are bad that they can't see another viewpoint. Its become "natural". And, as the author pointed out, Americans are so blind to it that you don't even see the problem with censoring nipples but not beheadings. We literally cant see that noone should be injured by seeing a womans breast, but seeing a beheaded body - thats OK? Its interesting to see this story…

America has something like 330 million people in it. I assure you, there are a lot of us who see the basic logic around this and think we should stop worrying about the occasional nipple. In this particular instance though, it's worse than your complaint. We're talking about censoring an iconic image captured from an important time in our history. I'd be willing to bet that even among the anti-nipple people, this ima…

We're not talking about censoring the image in any meaningful sense; FB told them it was cool if they blurred out the nudity. From FB's perspective, they want to draw a hard line against child nudity so they don't have to deal with the slippery slope between child porn and "art", even though no one thinks this is the former. Personally, I think blurring out the nudity is a pretty reasonable compromise.

Re: Facebook is imposing American censorship on the rest of the world

#109

Post by drstewart »

omginternets wrote: post #93
weberc2 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, you know, d) I thought we were talking about actual beheadings (e.g., ISIS promo videos) and not theatrics.

The theatrical dimension doesn't change much. That's how strange the US is in this respect. The amount of censorship for "real" violence is virtually nonexistent, contrary to the amount of censorship applied to sex, real or otherwise. Do Americans censor "real" violence more than theatrical violence? Possibly. Do they censor "real" violence less than any form of nudity? Yes. You can show Braveheart or a video of a st…

>And once again, this is not the norm around the world. The US is special.

Really? Have you been to the Middle East, or is your definition of "the world" a handful of western European countries?

Re: Facebook is imposing American censorship on the rest of the world

#110

Post by sp332 »

electic wrote: post #87
fsloth wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It is the main platform because those folks agree with the terms of use and privacy policy" I disagree. Do you know how many general users have the vaguest ideas what those things are? People en masse use Facebook because other people do - they have very limited of awareness of anything how Facebook skews their view of reality and what limits their communication on the said platform has - until they hit those limits…

I think you nailed it right there. People have not hit those "limits" and are okay with what they see on the platform. Since there is no decent, the people are OK with Facebook's handling of cleaning content.

[Assuming you mean "dissent".] I see plenty of complaining about what Facebook doesn't allow... like the article we're referring to for example. I even see some on Facebook, especially about the breastfeeding policy. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Facebook#Censorsh...
Post reply on HN