What would happen if Facebook introduced friction during sharing, making the decision to share more salient? For instance, click "share" and get prompted with questions about whether the source is trustworthy and whether you personally would accept responsibility if the content were misleading or misinforming, etc.
Facebook to ban white nationalist content
531–540 of 1001 posts
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#532I consider myself a free speech absolutist. Or very nearly so. But that runs both ways. Not only do I think that almost all (to borrow a mathematical term) speech should be permitted, but also that the onus is on the speaker to make themselves heard or to find an audience. No company or platform owes them anything. In earlier times, that meant that no newspaper or printing press was required to print everything sent…
What about the post office refusing to deliver letters? Or the phone company? How about no heat for nazis from the gas company?
It using the gas company’s platform to heat your racist meeting place allowed?
Facebook is a Privately Owned Public Place more than it is a platform.
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#533Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cynical Answer: It's affecting FB's bottom line. White nationalism is in the news and on the rise in the US/Europe and therefore spooking advertisers who only really care what the pundits in US/Europe are talking about. This soothes them over = money for FB. My hope is that the algorithms and models developed for slowing the spread of White Nationalism will also work (down the road) for things like Hindu Nationalism,…
Is that really cynical? The presence of hate groups on your platform being bad for your bottom line is a good thing, right?
> The presence of hate groups on your platform being bad for your bottom line is a good thing, right?
Yes it undoubtedly is, but they only seem to care about it now.
I would love to see a more proactive approach, but unfortunately proactive approaches don't often generate profit.
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#534Earlier quoted context omitted.
We're already there. Repeating a previous study, which had shown bias in the 2016 election, Dr. Robert Epstein shows that bias in the 2018 election pushed voters towards democrats. Approximately 4.6 million undecided voters are likely to have flipped. Numerous districts, particularly CA 45, are likely to have been flipped by Google's weaponized bias. There has also been an awful lot of bans of beginner politicians, a…
Do you have citations for any of this?
It looks like the poster above is referencing the following
[0] https://www.theepochtimes.com/another-way-google-manipulates...
[1] https://aibrt.org/downloads/EPSTEIN_2018-Manipulating_minds-...
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#535Why 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.
Your assumption is that this targets white people generally. White supremacist content is spread by a tiny minority of violent extremists in hopes of recruiting others to their cause.
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#536Good 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…
> speech that encourages harming others
How can it be consistent when some of the very same people that consider white nationalist speech as harmful encourage the spread of antifa's ideals?
I'd rather everyone feel free to share their ideals so I know who to avoid. It's going to happen anyway, and I'd rather it not be restricted to behind-closed-doors, so to speak.
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#537Earlier quoted context omitted.
>If Facebook decided to ban all Chinese, Islamic, or African-American content, then the conversation would be completely different. People wouldn't say, "so be it -- go set up your own servers". This is because we have laws about discrimination based on race. White supremacy is not a race. You're free to discriminate against someone due to the views they hold.
But you are not allowed to suppress the speech of people based on the views they hold. The first amendment does indeed protect even racists. Or at least corporations and the government are not allowed to.
Just the government. A corporation is not at all beholden to the first amendment.
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#538Earlier quoted context omitted.
We're already there. Repeating a previous study, which had shown bias in the 2016 election, Dr. Robert Epstein shows that bias in the 2018 election pushed voters towards democrats. Approximately 4.6 million undecided voters are likely to have flipped. Numerous districts, particularly CA 45, are likely to have been flipped by Google's weaponized bias. There has also been an awful lot of bans of beginner politicians, a…
Do you have citations for any of this?
He can't cite any actual citations because all the studies were made up by conservative think tanks which refuse to provide their data.
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#539Good 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…
[deleted]
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#540Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> we are in no way faced with a growing trend of violent leftists shooting up There must be quite a few really existing worlds then, because this is exactly what leftists always do.
> There must be quite a few really existing worlds then
Apparently there are. Please give my regards to the people who live on your planet, wherever it is.