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

Facebook to ban white nationalist content

newsroom.fb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#141

Post by jjjensen90 »

DuskStar wrote: post #103
yardie wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except they are not censored. If these groups feel like they want to espouse these dangerous ideas they still can. They don't need Facebook to do and the rest of us can ignore them. But at the moment Facebook's and Youtube's algorithms put some of this crap front and center in your browser. To the unsuspecting this can seem like validating and endorsing those ideas.

Are you really saying that these groups aren't going to be censored by Facebook? Censorship does not require a government.

They are free to express this content on any other platform, including their own.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#142

Post by jelliclesfarm »

anth_anm wrote: post #108
jelliclesfarm wrote: post #70

I am not a ‘white person’ (whatever that means) ...but I don’t want to see ‘white nationalist content’ banned. When people communicate on a public platform unself consciously, they reveal themselves openly and freely. There is no greater protection to vulnerable populations than transparency. Freedom of speech is a gift and a valuable tool.This move is dumb beyond words.

> There is no greater protection to vulnerable populations than transparency This is somewhat true, but your argument has a pretty big flaw. > When people communicate on a public platform unself consciously, they reveal themselves openly and freely This simply isn't true. You aren't revealing that you read this content. THe authors aren't always revealing themselves. Those who don't really do themselves any harm beca…

I think terrorist content is different from nationalism/racism. The latter is still a deeply held belief. Regardless of how we feel about it, everyone has the right to feel love or hate or superiority.

This is really a failure of state to install controls and protections from out of control elements. This is a breakdown of state measures to deter/punish unlawful acts and failure to protect WHEN actions occur rather than breakdown of society.

One cannot make an entire society conform. To me, that’s terrorism too.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#143

Post by bcruddy »

panarky wrote: post #66

Curious that a post about eliminating white nationalist content actually includes an image with white nationalist content. https://imgur.com/a/fSm1pHa It's perhaps an unintentional example of the difference between advocacy (banned) and education or discussion (not banned). Very interested in how Facebook will distinguish between them when both use identical words.

Did you read the sentence right below that conveniently cropped screenshot?

| Searches for terms associated with white supremacy will surface a link to Life After Hate’s Page, where people can find support in the form of education, interventions, academic research and outreach.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#144

Post by botwriter »

tathougies wrote: post #100

Why are white people specifically targeted. As someone of an Indian background, I've seen plenty of Hindu nationalist content on Facebook, and -- despite it actually affecting my Christian family who are still in India -- there is no ban on that content. Such nationalism has led to more violence and death than any of the white nationalism stories.

facebook only moderates posts in English

There was plenty of videos of the NewZealand shooter still up on Brazilian facebook

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#145

Post by commandlinefan »

atonse wrote: post #6

Good to see the Valley is starting to get off its "we are just a platform, all information should be free and neutral no matter how bad, so we're not responsible" extremism of the past few years and understand that some forms of speech are harmful should not ever be encouraged and accelerated on any platform or technology, ever. To the people that say "Where does it end?" – that's pretty easy. Let's start with curbin…

> "Where does it end?"

It ends, as it always does (and must) with massive hypocrisy on the part of the arbitrary censor, since "harm" is so poorly defined that it ends up being replaced with "whatever seems fashionable today".

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#146

Post by fixermark »

golergka wrote: post #119

I would love for all people around the world to become level-headed and rational enough so we can have complete and total free speech. Personally, I enjoy 4chan and don't experience any negative emotions conserving to people who openly advocate genocide that would target me and my family. However, people en masse are different, and tech platforms have to acknowledge that. So, I believe it is a good thing to ban and p…

Without delving too deeply, because I don't want to engender any negative emotions: do you take the people who openly advocate genocide against you seriously?

If you do and it doesn't cause you to experience any negative emotions, I am surprised.

If you don't, I am also surprised. In light of what has happened in Pittsburgh and Christchurch.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#147

Post by miguelmota »

randyrand wrote: post #67

Why not ban all racist nationalism entirely? What is unique about white nationalism versus Chinese nationalism in China, or black nationalism in South Africa? There are many racist movements all around the world. Only banning white nationalism is giving fuel to the white nationalist belief that whites are being unfairly targeted. That's not something we should encourage IMO.

One step at a time. Facebook is based in the US so it makes sense to tackle problems occurring in the US first.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#148

Post by Ragnarork »

99052882514569 wrote: post #71
atonse wrote: post #6

Good to see the Valley is starting to get off its "we are just a platform, all information should be free and neutral no matter how bad, so we're not responsible" extremism of the past few years and understand that some forms of speech are harmful should not ever be encouraged and accelerated on any platform or technology, ever. To the people that say "Where does it end?" – that's pretty easy. Let's start with curbin…

>To the people that say "Where does it end?" – that's pretty easy. Let's start with curbing speech that encourages harming others. But that is not where they're starting though, is it? They're going much further: >Today we’re announcing a ban on praise, support and representation of white nationalism and separatism on Facebook and Instagram Praise, support and representation not of speech encouraging harm, but the id…

Totally with you on the accurate labeling: this isn't censorship.

This is deplatforming, which is entirely different.

> This sentence indicates they're picking and choosing which ideologies to censor. [...] This is wrong [...] This is censorship of political thought, not censorship of "hate speech"

Are you saying that hate speech comes off of a vacuum?

These two concepts do overlap.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#149

Post by [deleted] »

rexpop wrote: post #136
narrator wrote: post #30

As an anti-racist conservative, the most fun I have on the internet these days is arguing racists out of their beliefs on the armpits of the internet. I relish my downvotes there. I would be bummed about these beliefs being banned everywhere because I wouldn't get to exercise my Internet debate skills to make a positive impact on the world without worrying about trampling on somebody's right to an echo chamber.

[flagged]

[deleted]
Post reply on HN