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

Facebook removed a fact-check on anti-abortion video after Ted Cruz complained

businessinsider.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 148 posts

Re: Facebook removed a fact-check on anti-abortion video after Ted Cruz complained

#71

Post by tathougies »

bdamm wrote: post #42
tathougies wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, that is terrible, but abortion clinics commit millions of murders each year according to pro-lifers, so your comment falls on deaf ears.

Globally? In the United States, this is not true[1]. Anti-choicers can claim whatever they want but we still shouldn't be repeating false data. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_Uni...

From your own link... from 1978 to 1997, there were more than a million abortions each year.

But... now that we know abortion clinics only murder a few hundred thousand, that makes them like twice as good as they used to be. That's how this works, right?

Re: Facebook removed a fact-check on anti-abortion video after Ted Cruz complained

#72

Post by bmarquez »

Kaveren wrote: post #25
dvt wrote: post #15

It's unfortunate that big tech is essentially acting as a "morality arbiter" in such cases -- perhaps we need not only a separation of church and state, but also of tech and state.

if you want a social network where you can say whatever you want without interference go use gab or 4chan. it's facebook's choice whether or not they want to do this. edit: "whatever you want" supposed to be figure of speech, seemingly this must be pointed out.

4chan (and 8chan) have a Global Rule #1 which says you can't post anything which violates U.S. or local laws. Also trolling and racism are quarantined to /b/

I doubt there are any "anything goes" social networks in existence.

Re: Facebook removed a fact-check on anti-abortion video after Ted Cruz complained

#73

Post by bdamm »

test45 wrote: post #17

Too much centralized cnotrol.

At some point there's going be some form of court system(s) evolve out of this, or else case law is going to lay down some rough guidelines for companies like Facebook that are going to have to operate their own internal courts. I could imagine a court overturning a decision by an internal company court on censorship, for example. Maybe it's already happening.

Re: Facebook removed a fact-check on anti-abortion video after Ted Cruz complained

#74

Post by danShumway »

I'm seeing a couple of comments on here to the effect of, "what did you expect when you started asking companies to screen/moderate content?"

This is not a good example of screening being impossible to do, or being too subjective to nail down. Facebook moderated the video on largely neutral terms; not asserting that abortion was right or wrong, just that the claims the video made were scientifically false. It should be the type of fact-check that Republicans can get behind: objective and verifiable.

This specific story isn't that Facebook can't fact-check, it's that ultimately Facebook is willing to define neutrality based on what Lawmakers are complaining about at the moment. It is specifically Facebook's commitment to "neutrality" in this case that makes it easy for biased groups to manipulate the platform.

I'm pretty sympathetic to the idea that increased calls for global moderation may have unintended side effects, and on average I tend to disagree with people who conflate neutral tools with complicity. But this particular story is definitely evidence in the opposite direction -- that Facebook is not opinionated enough, and that a commitment to avoiding even the appearance of bias can lead companies to make ineffective, gutless moderation decisions.

Re: Facebook removed a fact-check on anti-abortion video after Ted Cruz complained

#75

Post by hartator »

Miner49er wrote: post #64
hartator wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is FB is not fact checking leftist videos the same way they were doing with the right. Untrue facts about guns for example are never pointed out. Like almost every guns are semi-automatic. Including revolvers and handguns. Making banning semi-automatic weapons in profit of handguns a non-sense.

Most (many?) leftists don't support banning guns by the way. At the very least it's widely debated on the left. The term you're looking for is "liberal" or Democrat.

I thought US lefts = US liberals == US Democrats?

Re: Facebook removed a fact-check on anti-abortion video after Ted Cruz complained

#76

Post by Kaveren »

bmarquez wrote: post #72
Kaveren wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you want a social network where you can say whatever you want without interference go use gab or 4chan. it's facebook's choice whether or not they want to do this. edit: "whatever you want" supposed to be figure of speech, seemingly this must be pointed out.

4chan (and 8chan) have a Global Rule #1 which says you can't post anything which violates U.S. or local laws. Also trolling and racism are quarantined to /b/ I doubt there are any "anything goes" social networks in existence.

I don't know why that expression is being taken literally. Obviously if you make terroristic threats to the US government you're going to be in trouble no matter where you post. Obviously the context is given by the original submission.

The point is that the attitude I was responding to is extremely entitled. You're not entitled to use Facebook. You're not entitled to post about abortion without a fact check from Facebook, that is up to them. If you don't like it, leave Facebook.

I'm tired of the public square narrative, as if Facebook is the only forum for discussion on the Internet. If Facebook blocks my speech, I can talk about it on Twitter, or Hacker News, or Gab or chan boards (using these as an example), or my own website, or any other number of places for discussion.

Facebook is a private company.

Re: Facebook removed a fact-check on anti-abortion video after Ted Cruz complained

#77

Post by hartator »

jjulius wrote: post #55
hartator wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is FB is not fact checking leftist videos the same way they were doing with the right. Untrue facts about guns for example are never pointed out. Like almost every guns are semi-automatic. Including revolvers and handguns. Making banning semi-automatic weapons in profit of handguns a non-sense.

>The thing is FB is not fact checking leftist videos the same way they were doing with the right. Can you please provide data that supports this statement? >Untrue facts about guns for example are never pointed out. Using absolutes such as "never" in a statement like that can often be a bit of a stretch. Like my last question, do you have proof that Facebook has never fact-checked a single gun video?

I mean the burden of the proof is on you not on me. Find an anti-gun video or content that has been fact checked by FB. And you can't. All the fact checks we are seeing is against right wing content.

Re: Facebook removed a fact-check on anti-abortion video after Ted Cruz complained

#78

Post by JasonFruit »

ceejayoz wrote: post #44
aaomidi wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This... this is fascinating. Do you have any good sources?

No, because it's BS. Five seconds on Google: https://www.lemonde.fr/cinema/article/2017/11/15/l-ecole-de-...

There was one particular example, intended to encourage pregnant women to allow their Downs-syndrome babies to be born, that was disallowed by the group that determines what may be shown on French television. So not illegal, but the effect was similar, at least in that case.

Re: Facebook removed a fact-check on anti-abortion video after Ted Cruz complained

#79

Post by jjulius »

hartator wrote: post #77
jjulius wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The thing is FB is not fact checking leftist videos the same way they were doing with the right. Can you please provide data that supports this statement? >Untrue facts about guns for example are never pointed out. Using absolutes such as "never" in a statement like that can often be a bit of a stretch. Like my last question, do you have proof that Facebook has never fact-checked a single gun video?

I mean the burden of the proof is on you not on me. Find an anti-gun video or content that has been fact checked by FB. And you can't. All the fact checks we are seeing is against right wing content.

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Re: Facebook removed a fact-check on anti-abortion video after Ted Cruz complained

#80

Post by [deleted] »

dvt wrote: post #57
AlexandrB wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However forcing someone to carry a baby to term is also morally problematic. Even non-life-threatening births carry risks of bodily harm.

> However forcing someone to carry a baby to term is also morally problematic There are plenty of pro-choice arguments, but this is not a very good one. Coercion is often justifiably used when lives are at stake. For example, the government might "force" sick people in a quarantine given an epidemic outbreak. What you want to show is that the fetus is not a person and, therefore, doesn't have the same rights as the m…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN