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

Verizon suspends advertising on Facebook, joins growing boycott

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 356 posts

Re: Verizon suspends advertising on Facebook, joins growing boycott

#141

Post by grej »

cwhiz wrote: post #41

We want Facebook to censor speech on Facebook! But oh not all speech just some speech that we don’t like. Only we are allowed to define the type of speech we don’t like. And we reserve the right to change at any time. So, please just censor speech that we don’t like. On this day. At this hour. At this minute. And next minute we’ll tell you what to censor next.

Outrage Mob Rules of Social Media Engagement:

1. Any and all views expressed in opposition those currently deemed acceptable by The Mob must be censored, and an outrage/cancel campaign may be waged against any view holders

2. In the event views are partially or mostly aligned with The Mob, but said views are misinterpreted so as to be sufficiently in opposition to The Mob (deliberately or not), Mob reserves its right to demand said views must be censored, and to wage outrage/cancel campaigns against any view holders

3. The Mob reserves the right, at any point in the future and without statute of limitation, to retroactively revoke acceptability from any currently acceptable view. In such event, The Mob also reserves the right to wage outrage/cancel campaigns against any view holder who in the past, directly or indirectly, either expressed support of, or was misinterpreted to have expressed support of, any view for which The Mob later revoked acceptability.

Re: Verizon suspends advertising on Facebook, joins growing boycott

#142

Post by bilbo0s »

partiallypro wrote: post #54

I really don't understand this protest at all. If they really care about this, why aren't they pulling from YouTube and Google? Which has very very bad comment sections? I'm not for big corporations calling for people to police speech. Patagonia boycotted Facebook, but they have 13 factories in China...a country with concentration camps for Muslims and political prisoners. A lot of corporate good will falls on deaf e…

I don't have a facebook, so I don't know how they are advertising these days? But I know that on YouTube your ads won't show on objectionable content. Is there a similar system on facebook? Or do your ads show against all content no matter how objectionable it is? If you can't control where your ads are shown, then this boycott doesn't really surprise me.

By way of a contrived example, suppose there is content about a person who was murdered and dismembered on facebook. Well if I'm Ginsu, I'm not sure I want a ginormous ad for my knives next to that content. I wonder if facebook makes guarantees like youtube does with regard to embarrassing situations like that.

Re: Verizon suspends advertising on Facebook, joins growing boycott

#143

Post by ergocoder »

askafriend wrote: post #85
ergocoder wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comcast serving everyone. Planned Parenthood not turning away any customer. Airlines allow anybody to fly.

All three of those examples are insanely political enterprises. You basically showed your lack of awareness by answering the question.

I'm confused, so you say it's okay for business to don't do business with anyone based on political differences.

I give examples of companies that don't discriminate based on political ideology.

Re: Verizon suspends advertising on Facebook, joins growing boycott

#144

Post by Thorentis »

> Private company tells other private company which speech they should be censoring

Welcome to the new era of information folks. You thought private companies were too powerful before, well, guess what? You've now given them the power to control almost all forms of communication.

"But, but, private companies should be able to decide who they want on their platform! What about the free market?"

Wake the hell up. Read up on monopoly. And then read about the network effect. And then go and try starting your own social network that believes in freedom of speech, and convince 1 billion people to join. Then come back and tell me that the private communication industry is a free market.

Re: Verizon suspends advertising on Facebook, joins growing boycott

#145

Post by seph-reed »

rectang wrote: post #26
forbiddenvoid wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't fault Verizon for cutting budget. It's absolutely the right thing to do. But if we weren't in the situation we're in they probably wouldn't be doing this. The nuance between "we're going to stop doing business with Facebook because Facebook is bad" and "we have to cut budget from advertising and we chose to cut it from Facebook because Facebook is bad" is important. It's convenient to do this now, but hard to…

Why is it impossible that Verizon is responding, at least in part, to public pressure against Facebook?

Sometimes things or people change. Something or someone that would have taken advantage of you before, learns its lesson and becomes trustworthy.

When it comes to things that you are bigger than, things which you can stop if need be, giving second chances is noble. But when it comes to things that are bigger than you, things you can't change at all, one chance is all they should ever get.

Verizon does not "respond [...] to public pressure," they just have a PR team that is leveraging some current narrative for their own benefit. They aren't changing, and they will never love you back.

Re: Verizon suspends advertising on Facebook, joins growing boycott

#146

Post by shkkmo »

gguevaraa wrote: post #128
crazygringo wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hate speech is widely viewed as a legitimate exception to free expression, along with other classic examples of things like yelling fire in a crowded movie theater. Not by every country to be sure, but by many democracies. You're portraying this as some kind of whim that changes with people's moods, but that's a complete, total, 100% straw man. There are decades of legislation and jurisprudence, particularly in Europ…

Meh, the 'yelling fire in a crowded theater' is, rightfully, not protected under free speech but "hate speech" (which has no legal definition in the US) has consistently been allowed by the Supreme Court. Doubt we'll reach a hate speech exemption anytime soon.

The the phrase "shouting fire in a crowded theater" has am interesting history.

It does not come from an an actual precedent, but dates back to a supreme court decision that prohibited political speech on opposition to the draft during WWI.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_t...

In my opinion, the unanimous decision on that case is a travesty and the use of the term to justify abrogating free speech indicates a lack of understanding of the history of the government abrogating free speech when it serves their interests rather than for the common good.

Re: Verizon suspends advertising on Facebook, joins growing boycott

#147

Post by edoceo »

narag wrote: post #137
Consultant32452 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The triggering event, as I understand it, is they did not censor the President of the United States who said something to the effect of riots lead to death. There's two ways to interpret this. One way is that eventually people will get hurt in some way if riots continue. Another way to interpret it was as a death threat to protesters. FB's position was that even if it was a threat, that the protesters needed to know…

Thank you for the clarification. Now I remember reading something about an "antifa" flag, that seemed unconclusive... please, remember I'm a foreigner so my judgement may lack some insights you have. Actually all this seems absurd. Trump is a politician, actually a public officer, so censoring his speech is a alien concept to me. In my country certain politicians IMHO deserve jail for the outrageous nonsense they say…

You stated "all this seems absurd". An accurate description of American politics. I don't think you're missing anything.

Re: Verizon suspends advertising on Facebook, joins growing boycott

#148

Post by Consultant32452 »

postnihilism wrote: post #111
Consultant32452 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're giving Trump too much credit. I find it difficult to believe Trump is highly educated about anything, much less esoteric quotes and symbols used by dead racist people.

You think his marketing team randomly chose from a selection of polygons to run as the primary image on a national ad campaign? The Trump administration loves their dog whistles.

If Trump got a swastika face tattoo and posted a video of himself goose stepping on the white house lawn, do you think we should see that, or should the media censor and hide that from us?

Re: Verizon suspends advertising on Facebook, joins growing boycott

#149

Post by joshribakoff »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #47
narag wrote: post #21

I'm not American, I'm not in Facebook either. I've read TFA and still don't have a clue what is Facebook criticized for. What's that hate speech and who's doing it?

The triggering event, as I understand it, is they did not censor the President of the United States who said something to the effect of riots lead to death. There's two ways to interpret this. One way is that eventually people will get hurt in some way if riots continue. Another way to interpret it was as a death threat to protesters. FB's position was that even if it was a threat, that the protesters needed to know…

He also said he asked to slow coronavirus testing down. When his staff said we were misinterpreting him, he corrected his staff and said he said what he meant. He also used racial slurs to describe coronavirus. How many gaffes before we stop presuming good intent?

Re: Verizon suspends advertising on Facebook, joins growing boycott

#150

Post by nbardy »

grej wrote: post #141
cwhiz wrote: post #41

We want Facebook to censor speech on Facebook! But oh not all speech just some speech that we don’t like. Only we are allowed to define the type of speech we don’t like. And we reserve the right to change at any time. So, please just censor speech that we don’t like. On this day. At this hour. At this minute. And next minute we’ll tell you what to censor next.

Outrage Mob Rules of Social Media Engagement: 1. Any and all views expressed in opposition those currently deemed acceptable by The Mob must be censored, and an outrage/cancel campaign may be waged against any view holders 2. In the event views are partially or mostly aligned with The Mob, but said views are misinterpreted so as to be sufficiently in opposition to The Mob (deliberately or not), Mob reserves its right…

Small correction, It's not any view deemed acceptable. It's any view not deemed properly righteous. For any not displaying the correct righteousness will be deemed to have not just the views they expose, must also be hiding views deemed reprehensible.
Post reply on HN