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

Facebook freezes Venezuela president Maduro's page over Covid-19

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 259 posts

Re: Facebook freezes Venezuela president Maduro's page over Covid-19

#81

Post by macspoofing »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #71
macspoofing wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great illustration of the point I'm making. Thank you for providing a crystal clear example of how we got here. >This argument might be more appealing if we hadn't just come through a pandemic that an unnamed group of people were more than happy to describe as a hoax. Yes. If you give people a platform they'll say all kinds of things, true, untrue, and, partly true. Regarding COVID, what's interesting is so…

Hillary conceded literally in day one. The democrats who said "not my president" shut up and stopped protesting after a month. You're trying so hard to make it seem like this is a both sides problem but we all know that it isn't. Political rehtoric is far different than actually taking the capital over. Plus - the democrat lost elections due to it being "stolen" narrative you claim is being fostered by the democrats…

>Hillary conceded literally in day one.

She did ... and since that time has been going around claiming Trump is an illegitimate president and the election was stolen. Here's one source[1] but honestly, there are hundreds.

>The democrats who said "not my president" shut up and stopped protesting after a month.

No. That's a lie. Huge swaths of Democratic politicians, voters and media have made direct claims about the 2016 election being stolen (and any election they lost).

>Plus - the democrat lost elections due to it being "stolen" narrative you claim is being fostered by the democrats is more likely being fostered by the democrats political enemies.

No. That's a lie. Even now the new Georgia election law is being characterized by Democrats as a way to steal future elections. But these kinds of claims were being made after every election as far back as I can remember (I can remember the claim of presidency being 'stolen' in the 2000 election, certainly the 2004 election with voting machines being hacked, up until now). Stacy Abrams lost by 50 thousand votes and still claims that election was stolen. It's so normal for Democrats to make those claims nobody even bats an eye anymore. It's so accepted.

You have a blind spot for your side. You can see everything the other guys are doing wrong, but you don't see your guys doing anything wrong. And that's the problem here. You don't want tech companies to censor everyone by the same standards. You want double-standards. You want them to censor by YOUR standards.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trum...

"Hillary Clinton dismissed President Trump as an “illegitimate president” and suggested that “he knows” that he stole the 2016 presidential election in a CBS News interview to be aired Sunday."

Re: Facebook freezes Venezuela president Maduro's page over Covid-19

#82

Post by Sebb767 »

tsimionescu wrote: post #57
Sebb767 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... unless they want to reach people. Try publishing an app while avoiding the AppStore and the PlayStore - your audience will be fairly limited. Same thing if you're a politician (especially one not currently in office) and an US-controlled service happens to be popular in your country. On the other hand, though, I doubt that much of this is actual government influence. Most of these actions are probably done based…

> And this is not really an US problem; in fact, in terms of government influence on private companies, the US is probably one of the better countries. Only because influence typically goes the other way around in the US. But you're talking about a country whose banking system derives most of its value from government guarantees. https://anderson-review.ucla.edu/bank-guarantees/

I don't want to say the US is great, it isn't. The point is no country is great. A company residing in a country will always be somewhat dependent on that countries government and all of them have some form of subpoena, some form of secret agency or some politicians shoddy enough for backroom dealings. But some countries are worse.

My usual tip in these situations would be to use something under control of a government which does not have much interest in your dealings, but as a politician you're in the unfortunate position that a) basically any country will have a basic interest in your dealings or at least be very close to a superpower that does and b) you'll have to go out and seek your voters, which does not leave you much choice.

Re: Facebook freezes Venezuela president Maduro's page over Covid-19

#83

Post by marcosdumay »

capableweb wrote: post #29
dannyw wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't announce the discovery of a miracle cure via social media, you announce it via clinical trial papers.

You're just exemplifying the point. Who says you have to announce something a specific way first time? Back in the days it would be "you can't just publish trial papers, it has to go through the church"

> Who says you have to announce something a specific way first time?

Technically, at our current World state, government regulations say that. And yeah, you have to have the correct credentials and submit your paper to the correct institutions.

Superficially, the system is architectured exactly like the one you are complaining, while in a deeper level every component works in a completely different way. What in practice means that it right now works quite well (could improve, but it works), but it's just a series of isolated institution failings (instead of a full system failure) away from becoming like the other. So, well, keep those institutions in check, but unless somebody comes up with a better system design, there's little point on complaining about it.

Re: Facebook freezes Venezuela president Maduro's page over Covid-19

#84

Post by Kalium »

pumaontheprowl wrote: post #17

A lot of this is starting to remind me of the way Galileo and Darwin were treated for announcing their breakthroughs. I know nothing about this drug Maduro is touting, but I can't help worrying that one of these days somebody is going to find an actual cure and the world will never know about it because big social media companies exile them for wrongthink.

It's worth bearing in mind that Galileo was not treated poorly for his scientific advances. He was treated poorly because his scientific claims tended to run in advance of what he could prove, because he made an ass of himself when his peers pointed this out, and then he went on to antagonize the temporal powers that be.

Re: Facebook freezes Venezuela president Maduro's page over Covid-19

#85

Post by luckylion »

alkonaut wrote: post #77
Lazare wrote: post #37

Conventional wisdom in the US is that Maduro is a ruthless, violent dictator, who has suppressed opposition, smuggled drugs, funded terrorism, violated human rights, etc. But that doesn't get you kicked off Facebook. Facebook and Twitter happily provide platforms to violent, human rights abusing regimes. ...but recommend one snake oil cure for Covid-19, and suddenly the hammer drops, I guess? Interesting priorities.

I can kind of see the difference possibly being that Politics is slow moving. Journalists will call out bad behavior and other journalists will call out bad journalism. With some events - such as the pandemic, or the aftermath of the US election, information doesn’t have time to pass through the normal cycle. The damage is already done if a lie gets viral the wrong way. It’s better to suppress one truth and one lie (…

Following that line of thought, the best option for journalists is to only tell the truth if it coincides with "what's best to tell the public" and lie otherwise.

I believe that centrally planning "public opinion" is similar to centrally planning the economy. It's alluring because it'd solve so many problems, it takes a gigantic ego to think one was able to, and it usually doesn't end well.

Re: Facebook freezes Venezuela president Maduro's page over Covid-19

#86

Post by whydoyoucare »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #50
mc32 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously Maduro is a problematic despotic leader, but who are Facebook to be arbiters of thrush and falsehood? We’ve gone down the path of good intentions that leads to hell. Does this not interfere with self determination? Is there one true north now? Have Facebook found all truth? This is getting ridiculous.

For their own platform? Facebook is, obviously. How is this even a question? It's not like a head of state doesn't have plenty of power to send messages through other means. Since when are private actors obligated to let them speak on private platforms?

Facebook doing it of its own volition is one thing, and I'd argue they are within the right to do so. Government pressurizing Facebook to censor stuff is entirely other ballgame, which poses a bigger risk, and nobody seems to be paying attention to. (Most attention is given to the content being censored, not the actors behind the censorship).

Re: Facebook freezes Venezuela president Maduro's page over Covid-19

#87

Post by thinkingemote »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #15
cabirum wrote: post #12

People should start thinking twice before using US-controlled platforms/services/anything.

It is unfortunate, but US shot itself in the foot by proving that it is not willing to be a neutral third party, which it was perceived as in the 90s.

They (social media companies) were given an ultimatum: censor or be broken up. It's almost explicit in the Congress/Senate hearings.

Re: Facebook freezes Venezuela president Maduro's page over Covid-19

#88

Post by abhinav22 »

llaolleh wrote: post #66

I worry about this kind of censorship. There is no guarantee that the WHO is right either. Remember that the entire group of doctors thought blood letting was a good idea. How can we be sure that modern science doesn't have significant gaps in understanding either? Remember how the majority thought the housing market was too big to crash? I'd much prefer no censorship and let people decide for themselves. What we sho…

> I'd much prefer no censorship and let people decide for themselves. What we should be doing is trying to raise everyone's critical thinking game.

Indeed, raising everyone’s critical abilities is a great idea. Hopefully it gets done

Re: Facebook freezes Venezuela president Maduro's page over Covid-19

#89

Post by darkwizard42 »

abhinav22 wrote: post #2

Not sure about this - I don’t think government leaders or anybody should be censored. Better to have public health messages as part of the platform than to censor It’s a fine line between hate and misinformation and dissent (Clearly the content in question is wrong; but in other cases, WHO and others been proven incorrect - eg on masks and asymptotic transmission) Don’t know what the answer is, we don’t want echo cha…

Then they can spout whatever they want through their official channels. Facebook doesn't need to and isn't obligated to host their content.

In this case, Facebook can do what they please. Any uproar should be directed at the government which can go about using official channels as they please (press conferences, news releases, official government web pages)

Re: Facebook freezes Venezuela president Maduro's page over Covid-19

#90

Post by bopbeepboop »

alkonaut wrote: post #24
abhinav22 wrote: post #2

Not sure about this - I don’t think government leaders or anybody should be censored. Better to have public health messages as part of the platform than to censor It’s a fine line between hate and misinformation and dissent (Clearly the content in question is wrong; but in other cases, WHO and others been proven incorrect - eg on masks and asymptotic transmission) Don’t know what the answer is, we don’t want echo cha…

You don’t really need to worry about drawing the line between facts and lies just because you remove the 10% most blatant disinformation. It doesn’t make Facebook the final arbiter of truth. There are things that are controversial or debated and Facebook and others stay away from that. Advocating injecting bleach or eating albinos to cure Covid is one thing while arguing the amount of asymptotic transmission is anoth…

Okay — but in practice, channels on YouTube and Facebook merely mentioning COVID have to resort to euphemisms due to the extreme censorship.

So your claim they “stay away from” controversial or genuinely disputed topics is plain wrong: they censor those topics heavily on FB and YT to shape narratives — from COVID to Amber Heard beating her spouse.

Your idealized “just a little” censorship has already been exceeded — showing why it’s impractical as a political idea: it’s inherently unstable.

Post reply on HN