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

531–540 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#531

Post by dragonwriter »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #459
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do so many people that use the fire in a crowded theater example not know what it means? Do you know that’s not really making the point you think it is? Do you know that it is legal to yell fire in a crowded theater? The case so often referenced, was overturned.

Are you familiar with the Brandenburg v. Ohio's "imminent lawless action" test? If not, I suggest a quick review of that case law.

> Are you familiar with the Brandenburg v. Ohio’s “imminent lawless action” test?

Yes, and saying this is a perfect example of speech inciting imminent lawless action is better than making the comparison you actually made upthread.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#532

Post by hairytrog »

klank wrote: post #438
charia wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So uh, who's going to be the arbiter of what exactly constitutes intolerant or harmful speech? You? Me? Facebook? The government? Twitter? Whoever gets the power to define what's acceptable and not acceptable speech is given too much power. You might trust that arbiter now, tomorrow, but do you honestly believe their incentives will always remain pure?

The problem I see with that line of argument is that it basically means you're arguing we can't do anything about it and just have to accept whatever actions people take regardless of the impacts of those actions. It reads to me like "it's hard, so let us just do nothing".

That's right. You have to have a society with enough moral fiber that it self-polices and restrains itself almost down to the individual level.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#533

Post by throwawaysea »

minimaxir wrote: post #331
matz1 wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which is that some speech shouldn't be tolerated who get to decide what should/shouln't be tolerated ? harmful/harmful ? facebook ?

"Inciting a coup" is a pretty unambiguous bar for harmful speech.

Can you share a specific piece of evidence where Trump is inciting a coup?

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#534

Post by jschwartzi »

rconti wrote: post #461
Dirlewanger wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I noticed this last night. I mostly watch local news, but I put on CNN during the voting last night, and while the BBC was sorta talking over the voting going on in the background, CNN gave up on it entirely and it was just 5 people spouting outrage. Even when it's outrage I agree with, it angers me.

And indeed who voted and who spoke and how they spoke was far more consequential to our country than hot air from 5 random commentators. I was watching PBS NewsHour and saw people like Representative Cawthorn give very calculated speeches that were very disturbing if you read between the lines.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#535

Post by NE2z2T9qi »

tshaddox wrote: post #445
aprdm wrote: post #44

Regardless of being the right thing to do or not, it is very interesting to see a software platform banning a president of a country. Interesting times.

It seems more interesting that a software platform like this would be expected to treat a president of a country different than a normal person. Should the queen of England get even more privileges to break rules on the platform? And the peerage somewhere below that (but still much higher than the common folk)?

And what rules exactly did Trump break? He explicitly did not call for violence.

It seems like you want people silenced if they question the official narrative. That's precisely antithetical to free-speech ideals.

Do you know how often I've seen Republicans called Nazis? Or evil? Or that they need to be eliminated? I don't go crying to Facebook to censor opinions I don't like.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#536

Post by starik36 »

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…

You can't be fair when you only blame Fox for fact-free content when the same fact-free content(just inverted) is peddled by all the other mass media outlets. They just cater to a different bubble.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#537

Post by esja »

macintux wrote: post #463
esja wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuine request as I've seem this framing a lot and cannot understand it: Can you point to the specific things that occurred which you believe were part of an attempted coup, and why you believe they were?

Trump wanted Pence to violate them constitution and overturn the election. When Pence refused he then went to an angry protest and told them to match the Capitol and fight like hell. The then refused to deploy the National Guard to protect the Capitol and reportedly was thrilled at the fact that the certification was interrupted by the rioters. After much pressure he finally put out a weak statement telling the riote…

A coup requires that power is taken illegally (usually violently), and held. Are you saying this rabble of idiots were intending to take power somehow (what power?), just by occupying a building? How could this have ended with them (or even Trump) in power?

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#538

Post by Fnoord »

matz1 wrote: post #276
th0ma5 wrote: post #231

All of these HN comments are defending shouting "Fire!" falsely in a theater under the guise of it being a slippery slope before all speech is lost. I have lost a lot of respect for these slippery slope arguments because they are easy to make and ignore the obvious problem which is that some speech shouldn't be tolerated... Especially intolerant or harmful speech.

> which is that some speech shouldn't be tolerated who get to decide what should/shouln't be tolerated ? harmful/harmful ? facebook ?

Yup, Facebook decides about that.. on Facebook. Its only censorship if/when the government restricts freedom of speech, and it wass never absolute to begin with.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#539

Post by TheJazi13 »

disown wrote: post #420
aprdm wrote: post #44

Regardless of being the right thing to do or not, it is very interesting to see a software platform banning a president of a country. Interesting times.

Even more interesting is the blatant support of zuckerburg and facebook here. Of all places, you'd think HN would support free speech, but yesterday, you got downvote brigaded for mentioning that facebook and tech companies shouldn't be our censors. The logic was "we must protect democracy by having zuckerburg censor an elected government official". One moment it's facebook is evil. The next moment, facebook and zuck…

You can do the right thing every now and then while still being evil. It’s been obvious for a long time how stuffed with lies, hate and abuse the President’s social media account have been.
Post reply on HN