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

Poland plans to make censoring of social media accounts illegal

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 125 posts

Re: Poland plans to make censoring of social media accounts illegal

#101

Post by tremon »

pelliphant wrote: post #42
synnejye wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, this is absurd. So you would let all media companies censor someone "because they don't like him"? The only reason you trust private media companies is because they are supposed to be as neutral as possible, not political. If not neutral, then perhaps society should start treating them for what they really are - private political machines. Furthermore censorship is stupid. You might like it when it's Trump gettin…

That is a very american take on things... I am european and I have the exact opposite view: Public entities are supposed to be neutral, private ones are not.

Public entities have no obligation to be neutral, in fact quite the opposite: many political parties and labor unions are public entities, and their non-neutrality is the main reason for their existence.

Re: Poland plans to make censoring of social media accounts illegal

#102

Post by tremon »

markdown wrote: post #12
trhway wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It feels like letting the lies continue to spread is tearing out democracy apart. and the solution of course is "censorship will be increased until free speech and democracy improves".

Well if you remove the liars ability to broadcast their lies, democracy is improved, isn't it?

Only if you simultaneously make sure that the truth does get heard.

Re: Poland plans to make censoring of social media accounts illegal

#103

Post by tremon »

guerrilla wrote: post #98

So I've been reading everybody's comments as this comes up about five times a day now and did a little research [1] and the following is what I've come up with for these platforms: - They must censor what's illegal - They may censor what violates TOS - They may not censor what is not illegal and does not violate TOS I think breaking these rules would automatically convert you from a platform to a publisher and you'd…

You're missing the part where "what's illegal" varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. No international platform can simultaneously comply with points 1 and 3 everywhere in the world.

Re: Poland plans to make censoring of social media accounts illegal

#104

Post by guerrilla »

tremon wrote: post #103
guerrilla wrote: post #98

So I've been reading everybody's comments as this comes up about five times a day now and did a little research [1] and the following is what I've come up with for these platforms: - They must censor what's illegal - They may censor what violates TOS - They may not censor what is not illegal and does not violate TOS I think breaking these rules would automatically convert you from a platform to a publisher and you'd…

You're missing the part where "what's illegal" varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. No international platform can simultaneously comply with points 1 and 3 everywhere in the world.

I'm not missing that poiny but my post is. What is presented would have to vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Good point to bring up though, especially for we who wouod have to implement it.

Re: Poland plans to make censoring of social media accounts illegal

#105

Post by doctor_eval »

rriepe wrote: post #55
doctor_eval wrote: post #28

All I see lately is people conflating the right to free speech with the right to be heard . Free speech means that you can't be put in jail for something you say. That's it . But nobody has an entitlement to be amplified . That's not a right. Nobody has the right to unfettered access to someone else's platform. That's never, ever been the case. You never had the right to edit the front page of a newspaper that you do…

Free speech is an idea. It's also a law. Stop being pedantic over absolutely nothing.

I’m not being pedantic at all. Free speech - both the idea and the law - are about freedom to say what you like without interference from the government. That’s it.

I don’t know the name of the concept which says that companies should be forced by the government to let anyone use their platform to spread their lies, but it’s not “freedom of speech”.

Re: Poland plans to make censoring of social media accounts illegal

#106

Post by BlackFly »

doctor_eval wrote: post #86
BlackFly wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're only seeing a straw man version of the view opposing yours. Claiming to have a right to use a telephone isn't a demand to be heard, it is a demand to let a person talk to people that want to hear them. People blocking a number because they don't want to hear from it is another story. While some people are demanding the right to speak, most defenders aren't demanding the right to be heard, those people are dema…

It’s not legal, and you don’t have the right, to threaten or harass or people over the phone. There are all sorts of laws about your conduct over a phone. Owning a phone isn’t a constitutional right. And a phone doesn’t amplify your voice - you can only call one person at a time. I accept your point that people want to hear the message. But that’s irrelevant. There is no legal or historical basis for forcing a compan…

There are directly legal and historical bases for forcing companies to give someone a "platform" to speak, as I have already stated: telephones, mail, and public forums.

The debate is about how much social media resembles those communication media and how much of the philosophy of treatment in one situation is transferable from one context to another.

You cannot disentangle the right to speak from the right to listen, and that is why so many people are frustrated: their ability to listen to their chosen speaker was taken away from them. Which is my only point (having not given my opinion on where I stand): accusing opposition as demanding to be heard and have their voice amplified is uncharitable and misunderstands the extent of the debate.

Re: Poland plans to make censoring of social media accounts illegal

#107

Post by BlackFly »

stephenr wrote: post #76
BlackFly wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Free Speech is, in most societies considered to be a concept that applies to the government's ability to censor people's speech. While this is mostly technically true, unique aspects of the law in the US compared to other countries makes this false for practical purposes. For example, labor protection laws in other countries protect employees from retaliation for their speech: a company is usually only allowed to f…

Your argument about employment falls down because the law doesn't prevent them from reacting to things you do. If you go on TV and call the CEO a pig fucker, I guarantee you will face some consequences. If you go on TV and call the President or Prime Minister a pig fucker, you may also face consequences from your employer, but the government (in countries where a concept of free speech applies) can't do shit about yo…

You've missed the point.

The biggest chilling factor to speech in the USA is that your employer will fire you because a mob decides you said something wrong. This cannot happen in the country I live. That I could make my employment grievances public and this would give reason to my employer to terminate me with cause is irrelevant to the fact that my employer cannot fire me for wrongspeak on facebook.

Edit: of course I can still feel social consequences since my colleagues can make it very clear they disagree with me or find my view abominable.

Re: Poland plans to make censoring of social media accounts illegal

#108

Post by stephenr »

BlackFly wrote: post #107
stephenr wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your argument about employment falls down because the law doesn't prevent them from reacting to things you do. If you go on TV and call the CEO a pig fucker, I guarantee you will face some consequences. If you go on TV and call the President or Prime Minister a pig fucker, you may also face consequences from your employer, but the government (in countries where a concept of free speech applies) can't do shit about yo…

You've missed the point. The biggest chilling factor to speech in the USA is that your employer will fire you because a mob decides you said something wrong. This cannot happen in the country I live. That I could make my employment grievances public and this would give reason to my employer to terminate me with cause is irrelevant to the fact that my employer cannot fire me for wrongspeak on facebook. Edit: of course…

That's an indication that the US needs to fix their laws about wrongful termination. It's unrelated to "censorship".

Of note, the current president and the party that nominated him, many of whom are complaining about this current situation, is in favour of "at will" hiring, whereby a person can be fired without reason.

Re: Poland plans to make censoring of social media accounts illegal

#109

Post by mrtksn »

MStrehovsky wrote: post #17

Ironic that this news from Poland comes a day after activists go on trial for replacing halos with rainbows in a picture in Poland: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9142821/Poland-tria...

That's how these people operate.

You claim to value something but you are not maximalist, therefore there are exceptions you tolerate.

A demagogue that doesn't value it at all but he/she confronts you about your imperfection and demands to you to be a maximalist or you are a corrupt lier and claims that he/she would totally be maximalist about it.

You accept that you are a "fraud" so you oblige to the demand of this person and the value you claim to hold is now a value of someone who doesn't value it at all.

When you transfer the power accept that the demagogue has higher moral ground, the demagogue can drop the claim and do it's own thing.

A good example is Turkey's Erdogan. He was banned from politics but he suddenly decided that will of the people is the highest priority, he was a flaming democrat and he was right that it's not right to ban him from politics. With the pressure from EU and USA his right were restored and Democracy began to flourish in Turkey up until he had enough power to not to have to deal with this.

Fast forward today, He actually tried to steal elections(made the elections canceled, then he lost again with higher margin then proceeded to remove power from the office he lost) and whoever seeks support from EU or USA is labeled as traitor.

It's simply sad that the trick works so well everywhere.

Re: Poland plans to make censoring of social media accounts illegal

#110

Post by rriepe »

doctor_eval wrote: post #105
rriepe wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free speech is an idea. It's also a law. Stop being pedantic over absolutely nothing.

I’m not being pedantic at all. Free speech - both the idea and the law - are about freedom to say what you like without interference from the government . That’s it. I don’t know the name of the concept which says that companies should be forced by the government to let anyone use their platform to spread their lies, but it’s not “freedom of speech”.

Free speech the idea involves any censor, not just the government. What distinction did you have in mind, if it's not that one?

Assuming the person being censored is a liar helps your argument, but it doesn't really line up with reality at all.

Post reply on HN