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

91–100 of 259 posts

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

#91

Post by BaseS4 »

lupire wrote: post #75
jamesgreenleaf wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another problem is that something like this can function as "evidence" for the claim. There are large groups of people who believe that censorship like this validates a worldview in which powerful interests are censoring true information in order to maintain control. It's similar to the Streisand Effect or "Banned in Boston" but for belief rather than attention. It seems like the better solution is to have an outpour…

It's a hard problem. Liars can spam lies much faster than honest people can debunk it.

To counter this we should preemptively ban people just to make sure no one lies ever again.

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

#92

Post by BaseS4 »

mc32 wrote: post #33
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…

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.

How the hell is a despot problematic?

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

#93

Post by wincy »

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…

Does Facebook ban controversial statements such as “children should be given hormone blocking therapy if they request it, regardless of the wishes of their parents, even if it sterilizes them” or “transgender women should be allowed to go to/volunteer at battered women’s shelters”. Espousing the opposing viewpoint is a fast track to getting banned from Twitter/Facebook or wherever else.

Note I’m not making a judgement about these statements, merely using them as examples of things that absolutely won’t get you kicked off of Facebook for advocating.

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

#94

Post by seanmcdirmid »

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.

They have a specific policy against bad medical advice (which is easy to determine), but not against being a ruthless dictator (which can be very subjective). Seems consistent to me.

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

#95

Post by alkonaut »

luckylion wrote: post #85
alkonaut wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> 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.

Journalists wouldn’t remain credible (and thus relevant) that way.

This isn’t about states centrally planning opinion. This is about everyone’s duty to not do harm by relaying bad information. That includes journalists who should properly vet information - but not resort so self-censorship, as well as social media that shouldn’t let “a lie travel half way around the globe before the truth can get its boots on”.

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

#96

Post by sofixa »

concordDance wrote: post #9
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…

> It’s a fine line between hate and misinformation and dissent "Hate" is a pretty Orwellian[1] word in this context, with a meaning pretty far from its usage a couple of decades ago. Most usage I've seen has a distictively political bend. E.g. "X are stupid and science proves it!" is not hate when X is "conservatives" but is when X is "muslims". [1] see the section on meaningless words: https://www.orwell.ru/library/…

I don't think anyone claims that "X is stupid" is hate, regardless of how broad or nonsensical X is.

X should die, or X are vile subhumans stealing our jobs, or we should rape X, or X are raping our dogs is hate.

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

#97

Post by sofixa »

dpweb wrote: post #47
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.

The problem with that is, if it's not amplified on social media, it doesn't exist. There were trials where it was shown that sufficient Vitamin D levels (most people are deficient) is very effective in preventing COVID. It got minor attention, but no-one is pursuing it on a widespread basis. Maybe it works maybe not, but even if there were clinical trials, it gets crowded out by what's being widely circulated in the…

It must be your bubble/country, because in France it has been said and recommended by the Health Ministry that it probably helps, and doctors prescribe supplements with Vitamin D en masse.

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

#98

Post by wpasc »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #94
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.

They have a specific policy against bad medical advice (which is easy to determine), but not against being a ruthless dictator (which can be very subjective). Seems consistent to me.

Bad medical device is easy to determine?

Are masks effective or ineffective against covid? Are fats good or bad for you? Are carbs bad for you? How many times a day should you eat? How much cholesterol in your food matters? What's the perfect amount of water to drink? Is veganism healthy? is paleo healthy?

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

#99

Post by sofixa »

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…

> What we should be doing is trying to raise everyone's critical thinking game

How do you propose we do that, and what do you propose while waiting for the day where that's the case? The proliferation of Q lunatics and anti-vaxxers shows that we're not really there and there are real-world deadly consequences to "letting people decide for themselves". When it comes to public health, most people can't decide for themselves because they lack the medical background needed to understand the science and decide.

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

#100

Post by lupire »

dpweb wrote: post #47
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.

The problem with that is, if it's not amplified on social media, it doesn't exist. There were trials where it was shown that sufficient Vitamin D levels (most people are deficient) is very effective in preventing COVID. It got minor attention, but no-one is pursuing it on a widespread basis. Maybe it works maybe not, but even if there were clinical trials, it gets crowded out by what's being widely circulated in the…

Vitamin D has been recommended forever for general health and is available over the counter. Nothing is stopping people from taking and giving vitamin D in huge doses.
Post reply on HN