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

641–650 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#641

Post by [deleted] »

dionian wrote: post #556
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…

Fox (however detestable you may find it) was created as an alternative to the corporate media hegemony on thought, I fear you have it backwards.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#642

Post by three_seagrass »

jayd16 wrote: post #547
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?

As was said, this is just a slippery slope argument. Which is especially odd considering the platforms already have all the power they need. There is no more power to give.

Yep. The comment presumes that there is a need to delegate power to a single arbiter (there isn't).

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#643

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

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".

Incitement to violent insurrection seems like a pretty clear example of "too far." So is peddling provable lies to extremists which are easily linked to terrorist acts.

Ultimately you either think domestic terrorism is fine or you don't. I don't see a case for the media wilfully and knowingly misleading people and inciting violence.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#644

Post by whichquestion »

charia wrote: post #310
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.

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?

Facebook, the government, twitter, they all already arbitrate what speech is/isn’t protected. In the case of twitter/facebook, it’s the digital public square and the government is in the physical public square, for now.

One problem with this is that people do not have as much potential recourse through Facebook and Twitter as they might through the courts.

The penalties are different too. You might be facing a ban from Fb/twitter instead of prison time/fines from the courts.

Having skepticism in the arbiters of what is/isn’t protected speech is critical. We should be skeptical of them and challenge them if we think they are wrong. Organizations, like the ACLU, exist for this reason, to protect our rights.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#645

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

starik36 wrote: post #536
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.

> all the other mass media outlets

All? C'mon.

You can make the argument that MSNBC is a mirror of Fox News in terms of coddling its viewers, but if you're calling NPR or the New York Times "fact-free," you're only betraying your own ignorance of journalism standards.

Investigating facts and reporting them clearly is a solved problem. There are people who go to universities to study how to do this well, then go to work for institutions committed to doing this well. Their words should be treated differently than the words of some idiot with a Twitter account or a personality on an infotainment TV show.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#646

Post by bra-ket »

AlexandrB wrote: post #638
dionian wrote: post #556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fox (however detestable you may find it) was created as an alternative to the corporate media hegemony on thought, I fear you have it backwards.

As I understand it, Fox News was created as a "junk food" alternative to traditional media. By cutting back on investigative journalism and focusing on commentary and shows like "The O'reilly Factor" Fox could create "news" content for less than their competitors. I'm not sure if the apparent "right" lean was due to the ownership or to market realities that made that kind of content more appealing to right-of-center…

Fox is gone though, drown in liberal propaganda just like other corporate media. The only alternative now is DailyWire with its uncompromising conservative stance.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#647

Post by lallysingh »

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…

Video is a terrible format for anything requiring the reflection and nuance of politics. People need to read at their own pace, stop and make their own judgements, and re-read parts to make it all make sense. Video is a firehose that keeps attention instead of letting you _think_.

Leave it for entertainment and deep documentaries. If we had no more news channels and nightly programs, I think we'd both be happier and better informed.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#648

Post by Lendal »

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"...

We gave up on the fairness doctrine because it didn't work. It forced news media to give equal time to the 1% of crackpots who disagreed with the 99% of scientists on a number of topics, including climate science. It was always going to go this way, regardless of the fairness doctrine existing or not.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#649

Post by [deleted] »

techer wrote: post #466
bl0b wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I learned on HN some time ago that: > "May you live in interesting times" is an English expression that is claimed to be a translation of a traditional Chinese curse. While seemingly a blessing, the expression is normally used ironically; life is better in "uninteresting times" of peace and tranquility than in "interesting" ones, which are usually times of trouble. [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_you_live_i…

“Despite being widely attributed as a Chinese curse, there is no known equivalent expression in Chinese.[2] The nearest related Chinese expression translates as "Better to be a dog in times of tranquility than a human in times of chaos." (寧為太平犬，不做亂世人)”

[deleted]

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#650

Post by horsawlarway »

djsumdog wrote: post #549
horsawlarway wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shut the fuck up. Seriously. I live in Fulton county. My wife worked the polls. We're engaged in the democratic process here. This was audited to hell and back. It was checked, and checked again. It was checked by both parties. It was checked by the courts. It was checked by the governor, by the secretary of state, by the media, it was even checked by the fucking companies who made the ballot machines. So when you sa…

Just because you worked there doesn't mean you know everything that went on. How do you even explain the pipe burst that never happened and the counting that continued. Everything in your area might have been on the up and up, but things happened you may have not seen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keANzinHWUA Also keep in mind Georgia never did re-canvasing and when they did a re-count, they recounted the IMAGES o…

When one person you meet in a day is an asshole - you met an asshole.

When every person you meet in a day is an asshole - you're the asshole.

Right now - you're the asshole. Every party involved, from the courts, to the (republican) GA government, to the media, to the pollworkers, to me, is telling you this was audited to hell and back, but you don't give a shit.

Instead you post a video that was actually discussed in the call you're so concerned about, where the Secretary of state clearly says the edited version you posted was designed to make it look fishy, and after review of the full footage by auditors and the media, there wasn't anything there.

You're not arguing in good faith. You're either ignorant or intentionally deceitful, and I want no more part of it.

Post reply on HN