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

Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#311

Post by technofiend »

wyldfire wrote: post #275
technofiend wrote: post #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 allowin…

I suspect that the fairness doctrine change is more of a symptom than a cause. The FCC will have close to zero impact on twenty first century media. I don't know how or even if we can fix this.

I'm sure it's a symptom of something but my point was Fox News (which was established in 1996 according to Wikipedia) could never have been born prior to 1987.

What happened yesterday in Washington, DC may prove a counterpoint to 1st amendment claims that all speech should be allowed, regardless of consequences.

Edit: I see I was wrong about Fox as it is a cable network and not broadcast over public airwaves. I still think their viewers are insulated from opposing viewpoints and that's part of the problem.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#312

Post by ArnoVW »

kevinmgranger wrote: post #66
rasengan wrote: post #23

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.

When you're more or less encouraging a coup, the "fire in a crowded theater" analogy couldn't be more applicable.

Personally I always feel that the "fire in a crowded theater" is too specific to convince people.

Why not use more "every day" examples?

* I can't say I earned $0 last year --> tax fraud

* I can't say "fuck you" to a judge --> contempt of court

* I can't say my software will make you pretty --> advertising fraud

* I can't say you robbed me yesterday --> libel

I know this is a very European attitude, and always gets Americans worked up, but to me as a Dutch / French person, it seems obvious that free speech is not absolute. Just like the right to bear arms does not mean that I can own any type of military weapon.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#313

Post by dkjaudyeqooe »

hartator wrote: post #218
dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like Trump is just a regular president of a country. It's not surprising at all given his behavior. Being president doesn't excuse it.

What policies he pushed you are not happy with? Less taxes, no new wars, and leaving each state making their own decisions for covid-19 seems pretty center right to me.

I didn't mention his policies why do you think they're relevant?

I said 'behaviour' and what I meant is that his incitement to violence is beyond the pale.

FB, Twitter and many other people agree. It's obviously a value judgement but not a particularly difficult one.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#314

Post by technofiend »

Dirlewanger wrote: post #293
technofiend wrote: post #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 allowin…

Matt Taibbi talks about all this in his book Hate Inc. The 24/7 news networks needed new stuff to sell since the USSR was out. Turns out just general outrage at every little thing works good.

Oh, thanks. I'll put that book on the to-read pile.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#315

Post by Kapura »

This is pathetic, and I would be embarrassed to be a Facebook employee after what has transpired over the past 5 years.

Extremely too little too late. The damage has already been done, and done, and done. Over and over again. Journalism is a husk of what it was before Facebook's algorithms became the primary way many consume news. Engagement as the key performance metric has damaged the human project.

This company cannot be brought to heel quickly enough. I have zero faith in american regulators, hopefully the EU can do something, anything, to lessen the penetrative rot of this company.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#316

Post by alsetmusic »

silexia wrote: post #269
xxpor wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatsapp doesn't have enough penetration in the US for that to have ever mattered. I'd watch the EU for news on that front.

Most people on Hacker News are entrepreneurs that run their own private businesses. Social media platforms are not some sort of public utility. Social media platforms are private businesses owned by private individuals who can choose who they want to let in and who they want to kick out just like any restaurant or bar or concert hall. If you dislike who a social media platform allows or does not allow, just use a dif…

I believe you’re recycling your material:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25673152

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#317

Post by duxup »

hammock wrote: post #289
duxup wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what the implications are as far as facilitating folks who wish to take undemocratic steps that would seem to bring us closer to far more serious restrictions, imposed by those same folks as far as how a democracy is or isn't allowed to operate. Is it someone's right to use a platform to push an agenda that leads to impacting other people's rights?

>Is it someone's right to use a platform to push an agenda that leads to impacting other people's rights? Seriously?

>Seriously?

I don't know what you mean by that.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#318

Post by ls612 »

xxpor wrote: post #264
technofiend wrote: post #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 allowin…

Even if the fairness doctrine hadn't been eliminated administratively, it's very plausible it'd have been overturned by SCOTUS anyway. Not that'd I agree with that, but given the way the court has gone on corporate "free speech"...

The only reason the fairness doctrine could even plausibly exist constitutionally was because radio and tv were broadcast media using a public good (spectrum). Cable TV, newspapers were not affected and the internet likely wouldn’t have been affected either.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#320

Post by dionian »

andrepd wrote: post #175

I don't like the thought of trillion-dollar advertising companies being the custodians of the platforms where (sadly) a majority of speech in the world happens. That being said, if direct calls to violence and to insurrection against a democracy aren't grounds to take away your megaphone, then what is? If you're a free speech maximalist you'll be opposed to any sort of "censorship" (then again, people with those view…

If there had been direct calls to violence, I would agree with you 100%
Post reply on HN