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

Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 732 posts

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#391

Post by oldgradstudent »

dan-robertson wrote: post #387
oldgradstudent wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Zuckerberg compared the suppression of the story to due process in the justice system. In the justice system, you are innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Here, uncorroborated claims were enough. Not even a probable cause was required.

If you’re being tried for a crime, you can still be kept in jail, or otherwise restricted by bail conditions. And even if parts of the state may consider you innocent until proven guilty, having been indicted can be terrible for your employment either in the present (if being trialled means you can’t show up for work) or in the future (if, after background checks, employers wouldn’t like to risk touching you). So whi…

At least the judicial system is adversarial, and the trial goes on before a jury, and you can present evidence, and cross examine your accusers.

When a handful of social media companies decide to block a story, there's no one to turn to. They're judge, jury, and executioner.

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#392

Post by itronitron »

woojoo666 wrote: post #221

I found interesting how during the podcast, Zuckerberg compared the suppression of the story to due process in the justice system. A snippet from the podcast (with minor edits, starting from 7:25 of this video clip [1]): > Joe Rogan: is there regret for not having it evenly distributed and for throttling the distribution of that story? > [...] > Zuckerberg: yeah yeah I mean it sucks because I mean it turned out after…

What did you find interesting about that?

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#394

Post by arinlen »

hnav wrote: post #241
glogla wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

He’s an academic, I don’t think he “supports” like it’s a ball team. Whenever you try to find nuance in such a situation, you’re a POS to those with predetermined views.

> He’s an academic,I don’t think he “supports” like it’s a ball team.

Noam Chomsky is "an academic" in the field of linguistics and cognitive science.

Outside of academia he's an activist, and one which is very vocal in his anti-US sentiment.

This is not a negative trait. Free and open societies need contrarians and antagonists, as democratic regimes do not resist echo chambers. However, let's not pretend that just because someone is employed by a university that person is suddenly impartial and devoid of any personal opinion on politics.

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#395

Post by UncleMeat »

mc32 wrote: post #54
uptown wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“How are actions like this not a violation of the first amendment to the US constitution?” There’s still no right to publish statements on Facebook enshrined in the Constitution.

Right but this is the FBI, the government telling FB to censor a story.

No it isn't. The FBI said "hey heads up there is likely to be a lot of interference and misinformation for this election" and then considerably later facebook goes "hey this story looks like it fits the pattern the FBI told us about" and took independent action.

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#396

Post by philipov »

projektfu wrote: post #351
parkingrift wrote: post #314

So let me get this straight. Facebook has absolute control to limit the spread of a story or news on their platform. Facebook has absolute control to outright block specific content based on an algorithm they control. Facebook can and will editorialize content posted on their platform. Facebook has absolute control over the content that users see. Can someone, anyone, please explain to me why Facebook is not a publis…

The law protects small sites, too. It also makes users responsible for their own words, which is legitimate. Without 230, Facebook would become liable for defamation lawsuits unless it basically censored everything but the most bland content. You could "hack" the law by saying it only applies to companies with market cap less than 100bn. This is how some laws have been written in the past to specifically jeopardize p…

How about if instead, we nationalize Facebook. The public square should not be owned by a private corporation. If that's not possible, yes: Facebook should be destroyed.

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#397

Post by UncleMeat »

fareesh wrote: post #238

Is it possible to be an unabashed openly conservative / Republican in a company like Facebook or Twitter or Google? One gets the impression that it's a club for one kind of animal only.

I know a number of very loud Republicans at Google who post regularly on internal discussion boards.

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#398

Post by someguydave »

oldgradstudent wrote: post #278
woojoo666 wrote: post #221

I found interesting how during the podcast, Zuckerberg compared the suppression of the story to due process in the justice system. A snippet from the podcast (with minor edits, starting from 7:25 of this video clip [1]): > Joe Rogan: is there regret for not having it evenly distributed and for throttling the distribution of that story? > [...] > Zuckerberg: yeah yeah I mean it sucks because I mean it turned out after…

> Zuckerberg compared the suppression of the story to due process in the justice system. In the justice system, you are innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Here, uncorroborated claims were enough. Not even a probable cause was required.

> uncorroborated claims were enough

ah but they were uncorroborated secret claims by a secret policeman acting under “politically neutral” state authority

When someone is accused under the law “due process” means that the government has to explain what the charge is and provide evidence in public court.

The secrecy is the key and the biggest concerning factor.

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#399

Post by [deleted] »

refurb wrote: post #363
pstuart wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was the only point about the laptop -- to smear Biden.

It’s relevance is for the American voter to decide, not the FBI or Zuckerberg. The best part is that the attempted suppression only sheds even more light on it.

[deleted]

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#400

Post by bo1024 »

arinlen wrote: post #383
parkingrift wrote: post #314

So let me get this straight. Facebook has absolute control to limit the spread of a story or news on their platform. Facebook has absolute control to outright block specific content based on an algorithm they control. Facebook can and will editorialize content posted on their platform. Facebook has absolute control over the content that users see. Can someone, anyone, please explain to me why Facebook is not a publis…

> Can someone, anyone, please explain to me why Facebook is not a publisher? Facebook either disseminates posts from their users and/or links to sites operated by third-parties. Claiming that Facebook is a publisher makes as much sense as claiming hackernews is a publisher.

You seem to be thinking of author, not publisher. Lots of publishers publish material they didn’t write themselves, they’re still publishers when they do that.
Post reply on HN