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

Facebook Incubated the Insurrection

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 472 posts

Re: Facebook Incubated the Insurrection

#411

Post by yrimaxi »

52-6F-62 wrote: post #404
3princip wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because the media has cooking articles doesn't mean it isn't propaganda. At the time of the Iraq war everyone who cared to look into it knew the whole thing was absolutely fake news. If I knew it was fake, and all the people involved in the massive anti-war movement (in the UK at the time) knew it was fake then it wasn't much of a stretch for educated in the know journalists of the NY Times or other major media…

Your issues with opinion columns from 15 to 20 years ago does not render the entire medium of 21st century journalism "fake news". I'm certain if you read the entirety of the New York Times (and many other outlets) published articles on the subject you would find a range of perspectives, not just the ones that you're purporting sum up journalism of the past 20 years. I was reading the same outlets you were at that ti…

I’m glad that you were able to extricate enough material in order for you to exalt this type of medium. :) Their lack of understanding and unfounded purpoting has been betrayed.

Re: Facebook Incubated the Insurrection

#412

Post by 3princip »

52-6F-62 wrote: post #404
3princip wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because the media has cooking articles doesn't mean it isn't propaganda. At the time of the Iraq war everyone who cared to look into it knew the whole thing was absolutely fake news. If I knew it was fake, and all the people involved in the massive anti-war movement (in the UK at the time) knew it was fake then it wasn't much of a stretch for educated in the know journalists of the NY Times or other major media…

Your issues with opinion columns from 15 to 20 years ago does not render the entire medium of 21st century journalism "fake news". I'm certain if you read the entirety of the New York Times (and many other outlets) published articles on the subject you would find a range of perspectives, not just the ones that you're purporting sum up journalism of the past 20 years. I was reading the same outlets you were at that ti…

I haven't claimed that all content published by MSM is fake news or even the majority.

A war was initiated under false pretenses, published by these organizations. Everyone knew it was fake and a charade and they published it anyway.

This is a question of pot calling the kettle black. And in this case (against Facebook or in other cases Parler) the harm caused by MSM is far far greater than any conspiracy theory on social media.

Re: Facebook Incubated the Insurrection

#413

Post by dingaling »

52-6F-62 wrote: post #404
3princip wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because the media has cooking articles doesn't mean it isn't propaganda. At the time of the Iraq war everyone who cared to look into it knew the whole thing was absolutely fake news. If I knew it was fake, and all the people involved in the massive anti-war movement (in the UK at the time) knew it was fake then it wasn't much of a stretch for educated in the know journalists of the NY Times or other major media…

Your issues with opinion columns from 15 to 20 years ago does not render the entire medium of 21st century journalism "fake news". I'm certain if you read the entirety of the New York Times (and many other outlets) published articles on the subject you would find a range of perspectives, not just the ones that you're purporting sum up journalism of the past 20 years. I was reading the same outlets you were at that ti…

> Those sections are not all equal in their "truthiness"

So why are low-truthiness sections like 'opinion pieces' and 'commentaries' published? Well they're cheap, but also because someone's pushing a particular agenda, or agendas.

So how's that different from someone spouting outrage-wrapped half-truths on social media?

Re: Facebook Incubated the Insurrection

#414

Post by Aunche »

brown9-2 wrote: post #328
Aunche wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parler#Moderation > In January 2021, the Wall Street Journal reported that Parler had increased its moderation team to 600 people, and began paying them. They also had begun hiring full-time employees to moderate the service. It may be that Parler did too little too late, but I find it concerning that most mainstream news outlets are failing to report this.

and did they begin that hiring before or after AWS shut them off? the WSJ article is dated January 11 2021.

Why would they hire moderators when they immediately decided to shut down after AWS's announcement?

Re: Facebook Incubated the Insurrection

#415

Post by ashtonkem »

waylandsmithers wrote: post #179
ashtonkem wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One key takeaway from 1/6 is that a sizable chunk of the mob had no idea that they were doing anything wrong, and are surprised to find themselves in handcuffs after the fact. At least most historical revolutionaries had the self awareness to understand that trying to overthrow the state is super illegal , and maybe a bit of clandestine-ness is in their own best interest.

I'm not sure self awareness is the best way to put it though if they thought they had the blessing and encouragement of the sitting president. That's what makes this hard to compare to most of the revolutionary uprisings of the past.

We could probably quibble on the precise definition of “revolution”[0], but it sure wouldn’t be the first time one part of a government has riled up a mob to attack another part of the government. The results are usually what you’d enthusiastically call “not a good time”. Seeing the executive attack the legislature with a mob is unusual though, as usually the executive leverages their control of the military in these sorts of self-coups.

0 - While I would argue that installing trump for a second term would constitute a revolution, it’s an interesting question whether or not the rioters saw themselves as revolutionary. Calling 1/6 the new 1776 certainly implies yes, but a lot of them seem to think that they were actually a pro-constitution group there to undo a coup done by “the deep state”. Long story short, it’s complicated.

Re: Facebook Incubated the Insurrection

#416

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

ashtonkem wrote: post #390
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That just means that one side has a crazy who is currently in power. It doesn't mean that the other side doesn't have just as much crazy.

Sure. But that’s a pretty weird digression when we’re talking about one specific group of crazies that just attempted an insurrection and got 5 people killed in the Capitol. When the crazies on the left do something crazy, we can talk about them. But in this context bringing up such a “both sides” argument smacks of whataboutism.

> when we’re talking about one specific group of crazies that just attempted an insurrection and got 5 people killed in the Capitol.

Thats only because you are choosing to talk about that exclusively. You aren’t taking into account the violence and destruction about BLM.

I mean, a known BLM voice/advocate went and murdered 5 cops, and not one bit of that blew back at BLM the Org, because no one forced them to own their crazies. None of the destruction, murder and lawlessness over the summer blew back on BLM, Dems, Antifa.

It’s not whataboutism when it’s similar events. A whataboutism would be if someone said “the left doesn’t need to own their crazies because Obama faced criticism for Benghazi”.

Re: Facebook Incubated the Insurrection

#417

Post by JPKab »

dcolkitt wrote: post #86
mrweasel wrote: post #14

So is Google going to throw them out of the Play store? What's the argument for banning one social media and not another. Where do you draw the line that manages to keep Facebooks app available, while still being able to defend the removal of Parler. I know many will think I'm defending Parler, I'm not. I just don't see why Facebook is continuously given a free pass for all the horrible stuff on their platform. Is it…

There's a lot of rationales you can give, but the real answer is that banning Facebook would cause Google to miss their quarterly earnings. Many people are willing to take a stand for their beliefs, many fewer are willing to nuke their RSUs.

Agreed. To me parler is like a cult. It's small enough where nobody can pretend it's religion. Facebook is like Scientology, they got big enough and rich enough to where they could influence the proper people and get the free pass.

Re: Facebook Incubated the Insurrection

#418

Post by ashtonkem »

Tarsul wrote: post #401
rsynnott wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, even if they had a signed letter from Trump saying "this is bigly good, do this" that doesn't stop it from being super-illegal. He's not a dictator; he can't just give people license to do illegal things. As they should know very well.

well, as president he could always give them a pardon, couldn't he? (actually, I have no idea for what he could give pardons. And he won't be presdient long enough to do it for those people. But still...)

The president can pardon all federal offenses excluding impeachment. Whether or not he can self pardon is an untested question; it’s not exactly clear.

Him pardoning the rioters is a nightmare scenario, both politically and for the long term survival of the republic. But the only real solution for this is impeachment and conviction, as generally the pardon power is not subject to judicial review.

Re: Facebook Incubated the Insurrection

#419

Post by 8note »

mc32 wrote: post #297
sneak wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think Facebook should not have the power they have: to grant or deny speech as _they_ see fit, which may or may not align with the locales they operate in. They don't. You can still speak and publish outside of Facebook.

Yeah that’s as good as saying that since you can use Tor in China, it’s really not censorship because you DO have alternatives.

That's not a good comparison, since the government will still punish you for doing the same thing, regardless of whether you put it through tor or not

Re: Facebook Incubated the Insurrection

#420

Post by carapace »

ashtonkem wrote: post #99
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a sizable chunk of the mob had no idea that they were doing anything wrong Has anyone dug into this? What were the actual stories that caused that suspension of critical thinking? (Serious answers, please.)

Not being sarcastic, but a lot of them are honest-to-god cultists; their connection with concrete reality is tenuous at best. They think that Q is real, and that Trump had secret information about vague evilness being done by Congress (eating babies or similar) that was going to be revealed when they got into the Capitol. Then they were going to arrest them all and execute them as punishment for their alleged crimes.…

I've heard that too, not that they're a cult so much as a kind of Live-Action Role-Playing that escaped into the real world. I don't know to what extent that's true, but it helps me try to answer one of the questions foremost on my mind, to wit: what the hell did these folks think they were going to do? What was the plan here?

- - - -

From the article you posted there's a line that seems particularly telling to me as an older person who does not use a smart phone:

> As Babbitt lay dying on the floor, her fellow members of the crowd pulled out their phones and began to film

Even in this media-saturated era, that seems particularly cold-blooded or rather disassociated. They didn't help, nor leave, they started taking video.

Post reply on HN