Facebook takes down Britain First ads • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook takes down Britain First ads

#61

Post by drb311 » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 3:07 PM UTC

asdkhadsj wrote: post #45

Spivak wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends, why don't you want more churches built? Because it's a Muslim church and you don't like them? Because you're an anti-theist? Because you don't like the noise? Because you think their application for a zoning exception is shaky?

Curiously, is it better to be anti-theist than anti-Muslim? I have a feeling like I can be against religion, but not one religion.

Britain First is not for or against any religion. It's for traditional white British culture against anything new or brown. They're full of hate.

They should be allowed to speak but they ain't borrowing my megaphone. Good on Facebook for feeling the same (at last).

Re: Facebook takes down Britain First ads

#62

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 3:07 PM UTC

pointillistic wrote: post #8

Anyone remembers how the internet was going to liberate the expression, instead we got two, three bottlenecks manned (or is it personed?) by censors actively supported by the MSM and virtually the entire university system.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook takes down Britain First ads

#63

Post by miramardesign » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 3:08 PM UTC

vorpalhex wrote: post #4

As always, this begs the question between hate speech and disfavored political speech. I think Britain First is doing their best to actively revert the UK back 50 years, but I struggle to see why it is they're simply hate speech and not a valid political movement.

please the muslims are reverting it back a 1000 years with all their acid attacks and stabby-ness. y'all be praying to the east soon enough at this rate.

Re: Facebook takes down Britain First ads

#64

Post by lewisflude » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 3:08 PM UTC

robertAngst wrote: post #33

lewisflude wrote: post #23

I feel like this corporate censorship is awful for free speech. Specifically, because dividing people by beliefs/demographics increases tribalistic behaviour and the spread of misinformation. I foresee a situation where we have multiple social networks, each with radically different social/political slants. Similar to what we've seen with things like Reddit and Voat.

It seems like this is the first time non millennials had to deal with 'shitty mods'. They are new and don't understand- Its time to move off facebook. Same reason I'm here instead of reddit.

I think the fact that I've not encountered an "evergreen" community (i.e. one that doesn't go the way of Digg, Reddit eventually) gives me a lot of anxiety with regards to my day to day online community usage.

Online communities often feel ephemeral, but maybe that's healthy in the grand scheme of the internet?

I'm really thankful that we have good mods here on HN.

Re: Facebook takes down Britain First ads

#65

Post by pjc50 » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 3:09 PM UTC

> The ads were first spotted and reported to Facebook as hate speech by user [real name!] on 2 January and he received a standard response from Facebook saying that the page in question did not "go against one of our specific community standards".

They published the real name of the person who made the complaint! That's just asking for him to get death threats. This is one of those moments where "normal journalism" covers things which would be banned from most forums, in this case as "doxxing".

> A day later, when the BBC got in touch, it had changed its mind.

This happens a lot. They'll routinely leave terrible violent rhetoric up while censoring anything that looks like a female-presenting nipple.

Re: Facebook takes down Britain First ads

#66

Post by fxfan » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 3:09 PM UTC

Spivak wrote: post #28

alkibiades wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why is that hate speech? i don’t want more churches built, is that hate speech?

It depends, why don't you want more churches built? Because it's a Muslim church and you don't like them? Because you're an anti-theist? Because you don't like the noise? Because you think their application for a zoning exception is shaky?

I don't agree with Christianity's stand on gays. Hence no more churches.

I don't agree with islam's stance on gays and women and adultery. Hence no more mosques.

Am I a hater?

Re: Facebook takes down Britain First ads

#67

Post by ben_w » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 3:09 PM UTC

nemo44x wrote: post #36

baddox wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ads for a Britain First petition to stop a mosque being built in Maidstone, Kent, appeared on Facebook over the Christmas period, despite the group being banned by the social network. > The three ads and the page on which they originated have now been removed, after BBC News contacted Facebook. I think it’s safe to say that the “to stop a mosque being built” is the important phrase here.

The irony is their countries flag depicts a Christian cross and they have a national religion. I can see why people are confused.

That’s the first I’ve heard that the Union Jack or any part of it is a Christian cross. Proportions all seem wrong for that.

I agree with the point about state religion though.

Re: Facebook takes down Britain First ads

#68

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 3:09 PM UTC

drb311 wrote: post #61

asdkhadsj wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curiously, is it better to be anti-theist than anti-Muslim? I have a feeling like I can be against religion, but not one religion.

Britain First is not for or against any religion. It's for traditional white British culture against anything new or brown. They're full of hate. They should be allowed to speak but they ain't borrowing my megaphone. Good on Facebook for feeling the same (at last).

[deleted]

Re: Facebook takes down Britain First ads

#69

Post by growlist » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 3:11 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #35

mc32 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this mean countries with nascent independence movements will be able to declare these movements "hate speech"? I don't see much difference. Let's say Chiapas rebels or Puerto Rico or Scotts’ Independence movement want to seek independence, can the government declare that hate speech and have all that taken down? If this argument sticks, I can’t see why the above isn’t in similar vein.

The distinguishing factor is the promotion of hatred and implied violence. I remember when the UK banned Sinn Fein from appearing on TV, including their actual elected MPs , resulting in the ridiculous "words read by an actor" workaround.

> the ridiculous "words read by an actor" workaround

parodied beautifully by Steve Coogan in The Day Today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOUeauLWEaE

Re: Facebook takes down Britain First ads

#70

Post by toomuchtodo » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 3:12 PM UTC

fxfan wrote: post #66

Spivak wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends, why don't you want more churches built? Because it's a Muslim church and you don't like them? Because you're an anti-theist? Because you don't like the noise? Because you think their application for a zoning exception is shaky?

I don't agree with Christianity's stand on gays. Hence no more churches. I don't agree with islam's stance on gays and women and adultery. Hence no more mosques. Am I a hater?

> Am I a hater?

No, you are intolerant of hate and prioritize human rights about superstition, custom, and tribalism.