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

Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 442 posts

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#21

Post by Benjammer »

baryphonic wrote: post #12
Benjammer wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somehow I watched 1 or 2 videos on twitter right at the time, and got a good sense of what happened, that ended up being consistent with the jury ruling. These weren't even political posts, just some OSINT people I follow. I was not aware of any "misleading media narrative," since I don't consume any mainstream media outside of occasional twitter posts. Once the trial started I was actually very surprised how many pe…

Imagine you were wrongfully accused of a heinous crime, and were being dragged through the mud in the court of the press. You may have an option to present your side of the story, one which is highly persuasive. Yet this is actively suppressed on the town square of today, Facebook and Twitter. You aren't even allowed to raise funds on platforms like GoFundMe. As a result, the general public's first impression of your…

Was this suppressed on Twitter? What about the NYT publishing an objective analysis of the situation? Aren't we discussing Facebook, specifically, here?

In your scenario, do I not have any other options for showing my side of the story other than Facebook?

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#22

Post by koolba »

Between Facebook banning any support, President Biden labeling him a white supremacist, and the Democrat head of the judiciary committee Rep. Jerry Nadler suggesting a unanimous jury verdict was a “miscarriage of justice” which needs to be investigated, Rittenhouse is going to a busy man.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#23

Post by umvi »

mc32 wrote: post #17
rayiner wrote: post #2

> Facebook said it would "still remove content that celebrates the death of the individuals killed in Kenosha". But "we will no longer remove content containing praise or support of Rittenhouse", a spokesperson said. To be clear, for a year, Facebook banned content that would have been consistent with what an impartial jury ultimately found about the case. Which would have corrected a misleading media narrative about…

A very curious part of this is the president of the US calling him a white supremacist before the verdict is reached and the press secretary defending that portrayal [he shot three white guys]. A president who promised to 'bring normality back to the whitehouse'. That cavalier attitude toward justice creates unnecessary tensions in the community ['if the president says so, it must be true, and if the accused is acqui…

Also the president immediately expressing disappointment on Twitter at the jury's decision... what a slap in the face to due process

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#24

Post by Benjammer »

burlesona wrote: post #13
Benjammer wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somehow I watched 1 or 2 videos on twitter right at the time, and got a good sense of what happened, that ended up being consistent with the jury ruling. These weren't even political posts, just some OSINT people I follow. I was not aware of any "misleading media narrative," since I don't consume any mainstream media outside of occasional twitter posts. Once the trial started I was actually very surprised how many pe…

Having a strong opinion based on zero knowledge is like American politics 101.

I mean, yeah. Doesn't make it reasonable. You can either argue it's unreasonable or argue that Facebook should behave "ethically" here, I don't think you can have both. It seems like people want Facebook to help everyone to have a strong opinion based on zero knowledge, but they want everyone to have the "correct" opinion.

I think social media doesn't give people "the wrong opinion," I think it gives people opinions in general when they shouldn't have any.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#25

Post by thumbellina »

I fully accept that FB is free to run itself how it pleases.

That said, it's clear they are not in a position to act as a neutral platform for civic discourse.

I try to support technologies and platforms that provide a voice to all. Decentralized over centralized.

I try to curate my own list of sources, rather than rely on third-party curation.

How else can I ensure a healthy and diverse information perspective?

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#26

Post by jacquesm »

rayiner wrote: post #2

> Facebook said it would "still remove content that celebrates the death of the individuals killed in Kenosha". But "we will no longer remove content containing praise or support of Rittenhouse", a spokesperson said. To be clear, for a year, Facebook banned content that would have been consistent with what an impartial jury ultimately found about the case. Which would have corrected a misleading media narrative about…

Juries have been wrong before, and many times at that.

Personally I am sick and tired of the way this character is now put forward as some kind of saint, in my book he's a multiple murderer and there isn't anything that will change that. There is such a thing as intent and I don't buy for one second the self defense angle, that's akin to me tooling up with a bunch of weapons, walking into a bar fight and then shooting people that come after me and claiming self defense.

Of course the violent right now have their poster boy and a fantastic fig leaf to engage in some more of this, beware of sowing wind, you'll end up reaping storm.

There is a reason more civilized countries have decided that the state should have the monopoly on violence. This isn't 100% ideal either but at least it stops this kind of excess.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#27

Post by mensetmanusman »

Benjammer wrote: post #21
baryphonic wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine you were wrongfully accused of a heinous crime, and were being dragged through the mud in the court of the press. You may have an option to present your side of the story, one which is highly persuasive. Yet this is actively suppressed on the town square of today, Facebook and Twitter. You aren't even allowed to raise funds on platforms like GoFundMe. As a result, the general public's first impression of your…

Was this suppressed on Twitter? What about the NYT publishing an objective analysis of the situation? Aren't we discussing Facebook, specifically, here? In your scenario, do I not have any other options for showing my side of the story other than Facebook?

Facebook is orders of magnitude larger.

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#28

Post by [deleted] »

lostlogin wrote: post #11
uncoder0 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook is very damaging to the fabric of society and this is just further evidence of it all. If Facebook employed an even remotely accurate sample of the population based on political leanings and backgrounds for their content policy team this would have never happened. I think the amount of blame the left and media placed on Facebook for the 2016 election of President Trump are to majorly to blame for the whole s…

> Facebook is very damaging to the fabric of society If you had left it at that, you’d have had a lot of agreement.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook reverses Kyle Rittenhouse policy

#30

Post by jacquesm »

umvi wrote: post #23
mc32 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A very curious part of this is the president of the US calling him a white supremacist before the verdict is reached and the press secretary defending that portrayal [he shot three white guys]. A president who promised to 'bring normality back to the whitehouse'. That cavalier attitude toward justice creates unnecessary tensions in the community ['if the president says so, it must be true, and if the accused is acqui…

Also the president immediately expressing disappointment on Twitter at the jury's decision... what a slap in the face to due process

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN