Regardless of anyone's political affiliation and/or fear or trust in moderation, FB is a company operating a private service. Private as opposed to general elections where you and I have a constitutional right to participate. FB service is FB's home not our collective. So, I don't get why their new rule (long overdue IMHO especially after the NZ shootings) is a cause of concern, criticism or outrage. I should also re…
Have you tried reading more of the discourse before proclaiming to the world you don't understand it.? Or did you skip that step.
I suspect there is some value in pushing such content off of large sites to reduce the surface area available for recruitment. I used to think that pushing such content off a site or forum was futile and calling it for what it is on a site had value, I'm not sure that is the case anymore. If you look on platforms like reddit and such where you have groups in subreddits calling for race wars, general hatred, and viole…
I spend most of my time on Reddit, and you’re spot on here. Deplatforming is the most effective way to fight the spread of hate. It’s literally a cancer, and it’s goinf to take the chemo therapy of stepping on the toes of free speech to protect our country and society. Sucks, but that’s what it takes - especially when they wrap themselves up in the flag and hide behind the first amendment to spew their hate.
In that case, we should ban /r/politics, the_don, shitredditsays, latestagecapitalism, news and worldnews, and every other obviously partisan subreddit, because by time they're obviously partisan, they're downvoting and banning any dissent shared within their community, and thus are spreading hate of everyone who doesn't conform to their extremist bubble standards. We should also perma-shadowban all users who contributed any posts or comments to any of those communities, because they are agents of hate. We should only leave the most abstract or concrete communities focused on real things with nothing but objective curiosity, like gaming, or DIY, or buildapc.
As a non-white person living in America, this is scary to see. It's a policy targeting a specific race of people's content... How is that not racist? It will only foment more resentment and retaliatory sentiment while serving to make "certain kinds of racism" socially acceptable as long as it's the "right race" to discriminate against. Ban ethno-nationalists if you feel so inclined, not {{insertRaceHere}} nationalism…
I don't see why facebook would be obliged to host content they don't agree with. These people will always find a platform on the internet. Facebook doesn't need to make their recruitment more convenient.
I honestly wonder why do you feel the need to defend a business worth 138 billion with more than 2.23 billion monthly active users, 210 million in the U.S. alone.
Isn't it obvious that they are not just ANY business like a mom and pop store, they are THE place where public discourse is happening with a massive influence on culture, society and politics.
Yet people feel the need to jump in and defend their right to do whatever they want, because laws we came up with when people were selling bread did not mention anything about global corporations who control elections.
I just realized that facebook have deleted most generation identity pages. Im not affiliated with GI, but afaik they have ONLY done peaceful protests and they aren't even white nationalists... What the hell, this is beyond dystopian.
the other difference today is that 'the masses' used to mean ~millions of Internet-connected people staring at screens on their desks, now it means the whole damned planet, at all times. as these networks have grown to global scale we need to assess them for what they are, not for abstractions that may be less relevant now that these systems represent unprecedented "public squares"
> millions of Internet-connected people staring at screens on their desks, now it means the whole damned planet, at all times. So what? Those people use Facebook because they like to do so. If you feel like Facebook treats you unfairly then stop using it. It is permissible to communicate with people that use Facebook even if you don't use it. If you fundamentally disagree with the way Facebook operates then stop usin…
You are arguing from theory. That's not how people work. YOU might work this way, but that doesn't mean this applies to people in general.
If you make something addictive, people still hold personal responsibility and can decide to quit, HOWEVER the majority of people will still find it hard to do so and therein lies the issue.
> What do you think would happen if these "private companies" with such deep hooks into our communication infrastructure suddenly decided to remove all data associated to the Republican Party? For that matter, the Democratic Party? They wouldn't do that, because there would be justified public outcry. Luckily, as moral agents, we humans are capable of differentiating "general political party" from "white nationalists…
I can give you hundreds of examples of people being accused of being a white nationalist without any merit to it. To such a degree that this word almost lost its meaning. edit: Tim Pool for example was already accused. It will clearly be used to shut down unwelcome dissent.
Before we make this into 'conservatives being silenced', it's worth pointing out that the censorship problem also exists for leftists outlets that are left of the neoliberal centrist view of the D.C. Democratic Party.
I spend most of my time on Reddit, and you’re spot on here. Deplatforming is the most effective way to fight the spread of hate. It’s literally a cancer, and it’s goinf to take the chemo therapy of stepping on the toes of free speech to protect our country and society. Sucks, but that’s what it takes - especially when they wrap themselves up in the flag and hide behind the first amendment to spew their hate.
>Deplatforming is the most effective way to fight the spread of hate. As evidenced by what? From everything I see, deplatforming creates filter bubbles, which lead to radicalization, which lead to hate. After the rise of deplatforming tactics in the last 5 years, American society is more radicalized than before.
have to agree here. deplatforming is definitely not the answer. To use a crude but fundamental analogy, if you want to reduce the concentration of something you need to dilute it not separate it from the rest
What exactly makes you uncomfortable with calling genocidal racism "Wrong(TM)", and helping people leave it? Are you also uncomfortable with them banning child porn, or is that an example of punishing wrongthink too? EDIT: I invite downvoters to tell me why they disagree?
> genocidal racism not allowing people of European decent to have their own state, country, etc IS genocidal. Is it "supremacy" and "racism" to simply advocate for the preservation of a culture and people? Whether you agree, they should at least be able to talk about it without being labeled "genocidal racists". (Not talking about actual white supremacists . Don't believe I've ever met one.)
One of the best parts about having the freedom of speech is that I’m free to label those people genocidal racists.Freedom of speech doesn’t protect you in any way from being shamed for holding disgusting beliefs.
The direction that Facebook and Twitter is moving in is likely to provide a decent boost to smaller but federated social media like Mastodon, PixelFed, Pleroma etc. The corporate-owned and "one-size-fits-all" media seems to come apart at the seams as it struggles to balance an impossible array of different concerns across countless communities and cultures.