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

Nancy Pelosi and Fakebook Dirty Tricks

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 236 posts

Re: Nancy Pelosi and Fakebook Dirty Tricks

#11

Post by Barrin92 »

The most baffling quote from the article, citing Zuckerberg

>“I’m Jewish, and there’s a set of people who deny that the Holocaust happened. I find that deeply offensive,” Mr. Zuckerberg said. “But at the end of the day, I don’t believe that our platform should take that down because I think there are things that different people get wrong. I don’t think that they’re intentionally getting it wrong.”

Ah yes, the very common good faith nazi. You seriously have to wonder if Mark Zuckerberg would have such nonchalant views about speech and misinformation if he didn't have a tail of private security and a fenced in mansion.

What's the Muslim store owner in Myanmar going to do when the mob comes knocking on the door after some lie about him got the local village riled up? The degree to which these people live in an alternate reality isn't even funny any more. Nothing has consequences for Zuckerberg et al and it has distorted their worldview.

Re: Nancy Pelosi and Fakebook Dirty Tricks

#14

Post by Despegar »

Macross8299 wrote: post #9

>so are New York Times articles, because classy journalism looks good on the platform Interesting that a journalist thinks that Facebook is optimized for what "looks good" rather than what drives eyeballs. Facebook is just giving the people what they want. (To say nothing of how self-congratulatory that sentence is)

There's nothing self-congratulatory about that sentence at all. Facebook's algorithm used to promote a certain kind of clickbait until they changed it in favor of real news (which killed a bunch of media startups that were optimizing for Newsfeed traffic). Facebook has specifically courted media organizations with Instant Articles or video for Facebook Watch.

Re: Nancy Pelosi and Fakebook Dirty Tricks

#15

Post by gfodor »

Barrin92 wrote: post #11

The most baffling quote from the article, citing Zuckerberg >“I’m Jewish, and there’s a set of people who deny that the Holocaust happened. I find that deeply offensive,” Mr. Zuckerberg said. “But at the end of the day, I don’t believe that our platform should take that down because I think there are things that different people get wrong. I don’t think that they’re intentionally getting it wrong.” Ah yes, the very c…

I'm assuming people railing on Zuck here don't like Zuck, so it's odd to me they would prefer he become the world's arbiter of permitted speech.

Re: Nancy Pelosi and Fakebook Dirty Tricks

#16

Post by dominotw »

Barrin92 wrote: post #11

The most baffling quote from the article, citing Zuckerberg >“I’m Jewish, and there’s a set of people who deny that the Holocaust happened. I find that deeply offensive,” Mr. Zuckerberg said. “But at the end of the day, I don’t believe that our platform should take that down because I think there are things that different people get wrong. I don’t think that they’re intentionally getting it wrong.” Ah yes, the very c…

Those aren't two consecutive statements. Totally ridiculous to put them together and make it out to be something else.

Quite an ironic comment in a thread about doctored video.

Re: Nancy Pelosi and Fakebook Dirty Tricks

#17

Post by DyslexicAtheist »

m0meni wrote: post #7
DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #5

I wonder if it would have taken FB that long to demote the video if it had depicted Sandberg or Zuckerberg slinging racial slurs.

Hate speech and a slowed down video are two very different things.

slowed down to make the person look .... well sloooooooooow and senile. fact is the campaign was successful in fulfilling it's goal: disinformation.

do we have to discuss if ageism is worse (more evil) than racism or vice versa? who will be the judge? isn't a spade a spade and "toxic" is simply toxic?

Re: Nancy Pelosi and Fakebook Dirty Tricks

#18

Post by friggeri »

I'm very uncomfortable with the current trend of trying to get big tech to self police. They'll never get it right because of moving goal posts and moreover I don't want a private company to have that power in shaping social discourse.

If we as a society deem that type of content to be improper and that it should not be allowed on such platforms, then let's make that explicit from a legal perspective and regulate them.

Re: Nancy Pelosi and Fakebook Dirty Tricks

#19

Post by ar-jan »

Interesting how they're sidestepping the actually rather disfluent speech from Pelosi that prompted questions. Compare https://twitter.com/robbystarbuck/status/1131242531503534080 with the C-SPAN video: https://www.c-span.org/video/?460990-1/speaker-pelosi-presid... (e.g. from around 3:00): not edited.

Re: Nancy Pelosi and Fakebook Dirty Tricks

#20

Post by azangru »

frequentnapper wrote: post #2

Why can't Nancy Pelosi sue facebook for $100 billion for allowing a doctored video about her to spread? They can't use the Napster defense of "we're only a platform."

I am confused. Facebook is a person-to-person(s) interaction. If someone wants to show their followers a doctored video, why should Facebook prevent it?

(The other day, someone on Reddit reminded that in Russia it’s illegal to repost the Putin gay clown meme [1]. And of course there is the famous Chinese ban of Winnie-the-Pooh images. Is this in any way worse than removing the doctored video of Nancy Pelosi would have been?)

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/04/05...

Post reply on HN