Things from leaked audio of Mark Zuckerberg and his employees
1–10 of 434 posts
Re: Things from leaked audio of Mark Zuckerberg and his employees
#2So long as their speech remains legal, social media sites should not be the business of censoring elected officials. That is the job of voters and Congress.
It’s too easy to walk down a slippery slope where suddenly these sites have to regulate in accordance with whatever is the popular opinion of the day.
Re: Things from leaked audio of Mark Zuckerberg and his employees
#3>Here are my top takeaways from the roughly 85-minute recording
Is that recording publicly available?
Re: Things from leaked audio of Mark Zuckerberg and his employees
#4So long as their speech remains legal, social media sites should not be the business of censoring elected officials. That is the job of voters and Congress. It’s too easy to walk down a slippery slope where suddenly these sites have to regulate in accordance with whatever is the popular opinion of the day.
We're getting onto our own slippery territory here.
If I let someone into my living room, and that person makes political statements I don't like, I'm free to ask them to leave and not come back, or tell other people in my living room that I think the statements are factually incorrect.
If Facebook lets someone onto their website, and that person makes political statements Facebook doesn't like, why can't Facebook ask them to leave and not come back, or tell other people on Facebook that Facebook thinks the statements are factually incorrect?
Where do you draw the line between my living room, where I'm free to regulate who my visitors are and what those visitors can say, and Facebook?
Re: Things from leaked audio of Mark Zuckerberg and his employees
#5So long as their speech remains legal, social media sites should not be the business of censoring elected officials. That is the job of voters and Congress. It’s too easy to walk down a slippery slope where suddenly these sites have to regulate in accordance with whatever is the popular opinion of the day.
Facebook is only in this tone-deaf quagmire because they got in the business of censoring at all.
Now they created the expectation for them to choose and they said no.
Whoops.
Going to be funny when the Public Health Orders all start targeting social media.
Re: Things from leaked audio of Mark Zuckerberg and his employees
#6So long as their speech remains legal, social media sites should not be the business of censoring elected officials. That is the job of voters and Congress. It’s too easy to walk down a slippery slope where suddenly these sites have to regulate in accordance with whatever is the popular opinion of the day.
You know what would help. More alternatives. What if Instagram, WhatsApp, Youtube, etc were all still independent or there was interopability between Google Circles, Facebook and whatever else?
Watch how fast Facebook would adapt and be monitoring news and trying to conform to the public opinion if they felt they needed to compete.
The only reason we're in this position is because a reduction in real competition in the market and the only power they fear is that of democratically elected representatives.
Elizabeth Warren had this right. Break up the platforms, and force social networks to allow a download of your data in a json format and move to a seperate service. Easily. That is the ONLY regulation we need.
Re: Things from leaked audio of Mark Zuckerberg and his employees
#7So long as their speech remains legal, social media sites should not be the business of censoring elected officials. That is the job of voters and Congress. It’s too easy to walk down a slippery slope where suddenly these sites have to regulate in accordance with whatever is the popular opinion of the day.
We're getting onto our own slippery territory here. If I let someone into my living room, and that person makes political statements I don't like, I'm free to ask them to leave and not come back, or tell other people in my living room that I think the statements are factually incorrect. If Facebook lets someone onto their website, and that person makes political statements Facebook doesn't like, why can't Facebook as…
> Where do you draw the line between my living room, where I'm free to regulate who my visitors are and what those visitors can say, and Facebook?
Unless you have 22% of the worlds population passing through your living room this is a pretty poor analogy.
Maybe the town square is more apt.
Re: Things from leaked audio of Mark Zuckerberg and his employees
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
We're getting onto our own slippery territory here. If I let someone into my living room, and that person makes political statements I don't like, I'm free to ask them to leave and not come back, or tell other people in my living room that I think the statements are factually incorrect. If Facebook lets someone onto their website, and that person makes political statements Facebook doesn't like, why can't Facebook as…
> Where do you draw the line between my living room, where I'm free to regulate who my visitors are and what those visitors can say, and Facebook? Unless you have 22% of the worlds population passing through your living room this is a pretty poor analogy. Maybe the town square is more apt.
Everyone has more of a right to a public space (like a town square) than a private living room or a private website (hadn't occurred to me that being publicly traded may have implications actually).
As I've written in another recent comment, the problem is when Facebook or other networks become quasi-official sources for public communication. If the primary means that the government thinks I will find out about public health orders, mandatory business shutdowns, etc. becomes social media, I'm very concerned about the messy mix that "public space" and "private space" that Facebook will become.
Re: Things from leaked audio of Mark Zuckerberg and his employees
#9So long as their speech remains legal, social media sites should not be the business of censoring elected officials. That is the job of voters and Congress. It’s too easy to walk down a slippery slope where suddenly these sites have to regulate in accordance with whatever is the popular opinion of the day.
There are lots of options between full on censoring and not doing a thing. Displaying that certain prominent posts aren’t accurate is a good start, much like what Twitter did.
Re: Things from leaked audio of Mark Zuckerberg and his employees
#10So long as their speech remains legal, social media sites should not be the business of censoring elected officials. That is the job of voters and Congress. It’s too easy to walk down a slippery slope where suddenly these sites have to regulate in accordance with whatever is the popular opinion of the day.
Facebook is quite happy to censor speech.
Facebook banned me for 3 days for commenting on a previous ban where I had said "white people suck" and "white people are savages", both for pictures contrasting white people protesting vs PoC and First Nation people protesting.
Disclaimer: I am very white. I was not promoting hate.