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

Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 451 posts

Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'

#371

Post by phs318u »

lancesells wrote: post #152
tannhaeuser wrote: post #112

That's not censorship. It's Fb's and other social media's desperate attempt to appease new government to prevent strong legislation, such as being held liable for their user's content, forced real names, regulation, and breakup.

Yes, the question really is are they liable for the violence that's produced through their algorithms?

> the violence that's produced through their algorithms

I'm sorry, but please justify or rephrase this. People chose to do violent things. Social media may indeed be an accelerant, but someone kept providing fuel and someone was asking "my kingdom for a match!" (or more accurately, "a match for my kingdom!"). And in response, a large number were prepared to provide matches and light fires.

Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'

#372

Post by jtbayly »

Gabriel_Martin wrote: post #369
jtbayly wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

StopTheSteal is not a slogan of white supremacists. In fact, it has nothing to do with white supremacism. Are you saying that 60 million or so people in the US are white supremacists?

That's not a very generous interpretation of what I said.

That’s how many people think there was funny business in this election, IIRC, so what exactly are you saying if it isn’t that 60M people are extremists who need to have their voices silenced?

Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'

#373

Post by cambalache »

root_axis wrote: post #366
cambalache wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are such a juggernaut maybe you cannot hide anymore behind the "we are a private company so we can do whatever we want" defense. At 70 billion revenue your impact in society is huge, you are effectively affecting millions of humans.

> maybe you cannot hide anymore behind the "we are a private company so we can do whatever we want" defense No such defense exists. Should we treat every billion dollar company as a country?

> No such defense exists

No such defense exists? Have you read this site every time a new wave of social media cancellations happen? After every credit card processing company ban a group of polemical people?

"They are a private company they can decide what to do"

Well, maybe if you are extracting 70 billion a year from society it is not that simple as "I can decide who to do business with"

I think the government would be very interested to initiate an investigation if Shell decided to not fill your tank because they discovered you are a neo-Keynesian, even if there is a Chevron station 3 miles away.

Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'

#374

Post by logicslave »

courtf wrote: post #353
logicslave wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I support the right for both sides to speak out. What I don't support is endorsing one side, and then demonizing the other. Objectively, more police and citizens were killed in BLM riots. Tens of active shooter situations, vehicles used as weapons, billions in property damage. Storming the capitol is also bad, but demonizing it more so is asking for extremist trouble.

BLM protests were attended by tens of millions over the course of a year. I won't defend violence or looting or even property damage (the poor insurance companies!), but you must admit there's a difference between attacking a Target to steal clothing and trying to put a stop to an election by storming the capital. Ultimately I want the country to heal, but in order to do so we cannot continue to entertain insane crap…

One more thing I would like to add, Donald Trump gained minority support. Somehow amidst all this, BLM, and such this has been swept under the rug. Reality is not as it seems.

Healing cannot happen if people dont have a realistic understanding of the state of American politics.

Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'

#375

Post by dd36 »

chordalkeyboard wrote: post #241
dd36 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are these companies regulated?

I don't understand the question. There are statutes that both refer to conduct and delegate power to make rules. Enforcement of these statutes is the responsibility of law enforcement officers.

You said or implied this was a regulated market.

Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'

#376

Post by Gabriel_Martin »

jtbayly wrote: post #372
Gabriel_Martin wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a very generous interpretation of what I said.

That’s how many people think there was funny business in this election, IIRC, so what exactly are you saying if it isn’t that 60M people are extremists who need to have their voices silenced?

The number of people repeating misinformation isn't really relevant. You really seem to leverage many various fallacies, like slippery slope and argument from incredulity. My exact statement was, in context to the facts about white supremacy and far right extremists, both groups having a well documented presence at the attempted coup, that when social networks' legal/liability or moderation teams take action on the precise content that was used to foment a coup, it's not terribly shocking from a legal perspective. You seem to be shocked though, why is that?

Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'

#377

Post by root_axis »

cambalache wrote: post #373
root_axis wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> maybe you cannot hide anymore behind the "we are a private company so we can do whatever we want" defense No such defense exists. Should we treat every billion dollar company as a country?

> No such defense exists No such defense exists? Have you read this site every time a new wave of social media cancellations happen? After every credit card processing company ban a group of polemical people? "They are a private company they can decide what to do" Well, maybe if you are extracting 70 billion a year from society it is not that simple as "I can decide who to do business with" I think the government wou…

> Have you read this site every time a new wave of social media cancellations happen? After every credit card processing company ban a group of polemical people?

Every company is allowed to do "whatever they want" if you define "whatever they want" as "legally refuse to do business with an individual"

> I think the government would be very interested to initiate an investigation if Shell decided to not fill your tank because they discovered you are a neo-Keynesian, even if there is a Chevron station 3 miles away

What? Of course they wouldn't, companies are free to do business with whomever they choose as long as they do not discriminate against a protected class. People who post "stop the steal" is not protected, nor is it a class of people, it is a behavior prohibited by the rules of the platform.

Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'

#378

Post by chordalkeyboard »

dd36 wrote: post #375
chordalkeyboard wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the question. There are statutes that both refer to conduct and delegate power to make rules. Enforcement of these statutes is the responsibility of law enforcement officers.

You said or implied this was a regulated market.

there are regulations and people who enforce them in every country in the world. hence I affirm that this is a regulated market.

Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'

#379

Post by ffggvv »

BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #242
ffggvv wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

speaking for myself, i’m not dumb and don’t think it’s illegal for them to stop free speech. but i think we are allowed to be upset and criticize it or call for boycotts and condemn them. that’s our free speech. just like if twitter banned any support of lgbt rights i’m sure the left would cry and not just dismiss it as “corporations aren’t held to the first amendment” imo free speech is a human right and corporation…

And everyone else can exercise their freedom of speech by calling out the flaws logical inconsistencies in your criticisms of the content moderation. > imo free speech is a human right and corporations shouldn’t oppress it even if they legally can. just like they shouldn’t discriminate even if they legally could Private people and companies are under no obligation to offer their help and services to people who wish t…

you haven’t pointed out a logical inconsistency. please point out the inconsistency in my statements:

1. Companies are legally free to ban anyone they want. (in fact i side with right of the christian baker refusing to make cakes for gay weddings)

2. Companies shouldn’t ban people for their political opinions or restrict them from expressing them. It’s evil and immoral and horrifying behavior, but not illegal. if they do it, i will call it out as horrific. just like i think the baker shouldn’t discriminate against gay weddings even though they should legally be able to.

Re: Facebook Says It Is Removing All Content Mentioning 'Stop the Steal'

#380

Post by dragonwriter »

cambalache wrote: post #373
root_axis wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> maybe you cannot hide anymore behind the "we are a private company so we can do whatever we want" defense No such defense exists. Should we treat every billion dollar company as a country?

> No such defense exists No such defense exists? Have you read this site every time a new wave of social media cancellations happen? After every credit card processing company ban a group of polemical people? "They are a private company they can decide what to do" Well, maybe if you are extracting 70 billion a year from society it is not that simple as "I can decide who to do business with" I think the government wou…

> I think the government would be very interested to initiate an investigation if Shell decided to not fill your tank because they discovered you are a neo-Keynesian, even if there is a Chevron station 3 miles away.

Even if that was true, which it is not generally in the US, that's not analogous to what is happening. It's more like if Shell, instead of selling gas for money, was a peer-to-peer gas exchange service, and they decided not to let you participate because the traits of the specific formulation of gas you were providing didn't conform to what they wanted in their exchange network.

Post reply on HN