Live data from Hacker News

Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

facebook.com

241–250 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#241
I know Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Reddit and all the rest don't count as broadcast media but I feel like we got here in part because the 1987 elimination of FCC's fairness doctrine slowly allowed a shift in how we communicate with each other.

We went from specious claims and conspiracy theories being the subject matter of newsletters to their public broadcast to millions via talk radio ~and Fox News~, thus allowing people to descend into their own bubbles without ever having their views challenged. Now people seem to rely on social media to give them the same experience. When challenged too much people just pull up stakes to insulate themselves: voat, parler, and private facebook groups are only three recent examples.

It'll be interesting to see if whoever replaces Ajit Pai holds a different view on public intercourse over the airwaves.

Edit: Well as some people have pointed out, Fox News would have been exempt from the Fairness Doctrine as a cable network, i.e. it doesn't use the public spectrum.

As Wikipedia says "The channel was created by Australian-American media mogul Rupert Murdoch to appeal to a conservative audience, hiring former Republican media consultant and CNBC executive Roger Ailes as its founding CEO." So my personal view that Fox (among others) is responsible for a) exposing millions to fact-free content without opposing views and b) people got used to that and don't like it when it's challenged created the bubble we have today. I'm wrong that the Fairness Doctrine would have prevented Fox, although it might have prevented talk radio.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#242
Many were waiting for this moment, and being on the way out I guess it's the most appropriate to take such decision instead of the past 4 years where they may have been hit back. I wonder, though, were will they (as in social platforms, hosting services, any site providing people "speech") draw the line in the future? There's been a lot of foul words online in the past few days. I don't like the ever so increasing extremization of Internet circles, slowly turning into the so called "echo chambers" most fit and aligned for one's beliefs no matter their actual truth, falling down spirals of disinformation. It'll be disastrous if all of us don't realize things displayed on a screen are not a reflection of reality.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#243

Facebook is not a platform to have a voice. It’s a platform that harvests thoughts and publicizes the ones FB most agrees with while censoring those it does not. This is a slippery slope and, quite frankly, it’s the people that lose.

Why is Trump's 'voice' or anyone else's more important than FB's 'voice'? Is free speech only for some people? If I come to your house and rant about my favorite subject you shouldn't be able to silence me? Should Trump (or anyone else) have the right to sully FB in defiance of its management wishes? FB doesn't have a special responsibility, it's a for-profit business that has an obligation to it's shareholders.not s…

Right now, FB are getting to have their cake and eat it - Section 230 gives them almost complete immunity from how they use their "voice" on the supposed basis that it's supposedly their users' speech and not theirs, including getting to decide which political violence to support, but they also get full freedom to decide which not-their-speech gets heard and by whom based on their own whims. Ordinary humans who aren't multi-billion-dollar corporations controlling one of the main methods of communication do not have this level of free speech rights.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#244

Facebook is not a platform to have a voice. It’s a platform that harvests thoughts and publicizes the ones FB most agrees with while censoring those it does not. This is a slippery slope and, quite frankly, it’s the people that lose.

Yep, but the problem with people commenting there is, that thay don't like Trump, and cheer for his removal.... when the turntables are turned, and someone else is cheering, it'll be too late, because the precedent has been set, and we've let them do it.

It is surprising how short sighted some people are. This pendulum will swing, and so will the reaction.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#245
post #179

Facebook is not a platform to have a voice. It’s a platform that harvests thoughts and publicizes the ones FB most agrees with while censoring those it does not. This is a slippery slope and, quite frankly, it’s the people that lose.

So while the Capitol is very symbolic, there wasn’t looting, rioting or major vandalism on the part of the protesters (compare to the “Autonomous Zone” and police precinct burning in Seattle. Does that mean in the future demonstrations and protests that could potentially end up in violence like that be suppressed by Facebook and Twitter? Or can we expect partisanship and see them bless other protests that turn to vio…

Occupying the washington monument is symbolic.

Invading the capitol building to stop the electoral count and intimidate congress into overturning the election results is not symbolic.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#246
post #179

Facebook is not a platform to have a voice. It’s a platform that harvests thoughts and publicizes the ones FB most agrees with while censoring those it does not. This is a slippery slope and, quite frankly, it’s the people that lose.

So while the Capitol is very symbolic, there wasn’t looting, rioting or major vandalism on the part of the protesters (compare to the “Autonomous Zone” and police precinct burning in Seattle. Does that mean in the future demonstrations and protests that could potentially end up in violence like that be suppressed by Facebook and Twitter? Or can we expect partisanship and see them bless other protests that turn to vio…

Um, excuse me? They shattered windows, climbed walls, forced open doors and intimidated people — the very things conservatives told us for months were deserving of vicious police crackdowns.

There are pictures of literal Nazis — like, literal literal — holding up nameplates broken off walls [1]. They broke into offices, left threatening messages [2], made it out safely and proudly showed off stolen items [3].

[1] https://twitter.com/beschlossdc/status/1346971421134741505

[2] https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-supporters-leave-threa...

[3] https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/ks29bj/the_man_shown_...

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#247
post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, either Trump is a cult leader who is threatening the very core of our democracy, or the election was rigged and we're about to get a Chinese style Manchurian candidate in the White House. I'm so glad that the media vigorously looked into these allegations of corruption and fraud, instead of dismissing them for partisan reasons, because then we might have a split, between people who get their information from…

The allegations were thrown out by every court they got brought to and by conservative judges as well. It's a farce and you're the sheep getting fleeced.

They should've humoured them just to shut up the people saying those things then.

I think the partisanship is what's really driving people like this. The Trump/Russia stuff was investigated, why not investigate election fraud too?

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#248
post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet there was no censorship occurring when the left \b\b\b\b opposing side was encouraging domestic terrorism.

When did a leftist public official go on Facebook and encourage protesters to smash store windows and set cars on fire? Can you give some examples?

>> When did a leftist public official go on Facebook and encourage protesters to smash store windows and set cars on fire? Can you give some examples?

When did Trump? Can you give examples?

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Acknowledging that some of the comments there are pretty messed up is not the same thing as advocating for censorship. Criticism isn't censorship, criticism is free speech.

So I'm being downvoted which leads to censorship on this site, but all I did was criticize the comment, and I didn't downvote.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, but the problem with people commenting there is, that thay don't like Trump, and cheer for his removal.... when the turntables are turned, and someone else is cheering, it'll be too late, because the precedent has been set, and we've let them do it.

That's a false equivalence, because the words of the president directly incited violence and resulted in an angry mob storming the capitol building. I would hope that if a left-leaning politician did the same that the same precedent would be applied.

> because the words of the president directly incited violence

Do you have those words? I never saw them because they were censored apparently.

Edit: lol HN, actually asking, chill out. Apparently asking for sources is just unacceptable. Here it is in text because I think they truth is important that n it’s entirety:

""I know your pain. I know you’re hurt. We had an election that was stolen from us. It was a landslide election, and everyone knows it, especially the other side. But you have to go home now. We have to have peace. We have to have law and order. We have to respect our great people in law and order. We don’t want anybody hurt. It’s a very tough period of time. There’s never been a time like this where such a thing happened where they could take it away from all of us — from me, from you, from our country. This was a fraudulent election. But we can’t play into the hands of these people. We have to have peace. So go home. We love you. You’re very special. You’ve seen what happens. You see the way others are treated — that are so bad and so evil. I know how you feel, but go home and go home in peace."""

Post reply on HN