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

Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 1001 posts

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#51

Post by throw310822 »

renegat0x0 wrote: post #49

- some people cannot think abstractly about speech, because it is skewed because of actions of Elon Musk, or Zuckerberg, or other individuals - it is certain that governments want to control the narrative, and it is not always done in our interests - sometime actions are done to help us, but [disinformation enters the room] - Everything at CEO level is "political" - centralization of social media and forums allowed f…

A quick reminder of how democracy works:

people's choice -> government -> media -> narrative -> people's choice

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#52

Post by ErikBjare »

ericjmorey wrote: post #18
TMWNN wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nonetheless, better late than never for Zuckerberg to admit that he and Facebook erred.

I think the original point was that this wasn't late. It was timed to be influential to the outcome of the election.

I think it was timed to be relevant. Doubt this will influence the outcome of the election, esp given the WH statement which seems to be in agreement.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#53

Post by scott_w »

cheeseomlit wrote: post #47
scott_w wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> censor posts about both those topics for political reasons In the context of Covid disinformation, "political reasons" is simply not correct. We're only 2 years out but it was clear even at the time that there was a concerted effort to pretend there wasn't an active pandemic and governments were right to crack down on it. The only thread connecting them is "disinformation" which is tenuous at best. It's not clear t…

Suppressing the lab leak theory certainly seemed political to me

The length of the Wikipedia article on this nonsensical conspiracy theory runs counter to your argument that it was "suppressed."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_lab_leak_theory

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#54

Post by croon »

ecuaflo wrote: post #29
defrost wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Below are a couple examples from ChatGPT: Please don't do this.

What’s the preferred way of citing my source? Or are you saying ChatGPT isn’t a valid source?

It's not deterministic output, neither in phrasing or meaning. So it is absolutely not a valid source. It can incidentally be correct, possibly even most of the time, but there's certainly no guarantee. Wikipedia at least references sources (that in turn can be scrutinized/falsified if questionable).

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#55

Post by archagon »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #39
mrtksn wrote: post #31

In a few years they are going to be sorry for the other end of the spectrum because the issue stems from the fundamentals of their business: lack of mechanism to hold civil discussion, one person pretending to be multiple people, institutions pretending to be people. When a BS is viewed 10M times and its correction is viewed 10K times, what do you do? Demote the content you assume that it's BS but this time you have…

> When a BS is viewed 10M times and its correction is viewed 10K times, what do you do? Journalism has always been this though, story as full page headline correction as a footnote.

Not on this scale.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#56

Post by greenthrow »

mandmandam wrote: post #27
greenthrow wrote: post #13

Facebook, Instagram, etc. moderating content isn't a free speech issue. They are just glorified bulletin boards. They try to raise everyone's sense of their importance by claiming it to be a free speech issue, but they are awful garbage and the sooner everyone realizes the better for society.

We're talking about nearly 200 million posts, at least, having been wiped and suppressed [0]. Many of these were both 100% true and highly important. The effects of their suppression are still felt to this day; in broken minds, broken relationships, destroyed careers, a stunted generation, and unnecessary excess deaths. Serious and brave academics were threatened and had their voices stilled. Describing Zuck's censor…

Why would the number of posts matter? I don't care if it was 200 or 200 billion. Nothing in my original comment changes. Same for number of users. These are private platforms, not public spaces. They are not open. They are not free. They use the lie that they have anything to do with free speech as a marketing tool. Stop falling for it.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#57

Post by scott_w »

h2odragon wrote: post #42
scott_w wrote: post #15

This whole article is really confusing. It sounds like there were two things: - Covid disinformation - Some nonsense about Hunter Biden and they're being conflated. What does Hunter Biden's laptop have to do with preventing Covid disinformation? A disease that was estimated to kill up to 30m people worldwide.

"some nonsense" about Hunter was proven true, tho. If the Federal Government was telling media companies, right now, that they couldn't show video of Trumps' family sexual escapades (that the Trump family took); that would be similar. Hunter's pedicure was not russian disinformation, and the government knew that when it told media companies it couldn't be spoken of. That is election interference.

> What does Hunter Biden's laptop have to do with preventing Covid disinformation?

Nothing you said answered my question.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#59

Post by Eddy_Viscosity2 »

chasd00 wrote: post #46

When the platforms starting censoring during the pandemic and last election cycle I remember saying they better get it right 100% of the time because the moment they get it wrong their credibility is shot. Hear we are. Censorship, beyond what’s required by law, is doomed to fail.

They were already doing censorship, just for different things - there was never a free for all because that eventually ends up like 4chan which is not advertiser-friendly.

So you can lose credibility two ways, one by not doing any censorship because people on the internet will be the worst if you let them. Doing too much censorship is also bad because people don't like that either. Of the big causes of censorship currently, I think of things like youtubes copyright claim process and how that is routinely used as a censorship backdoor by anyone - including the police. Sometimes its not even for any good reason and done by unthinking bots. This is banning more perfectly fine content than anything the government has done. I don't understand why there isn't more pushback against that process to punish people for frivolous claims.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#60

Post by toofy »

here we go again. another election cycle where some of the loudest voices with some of the largest platforms ever in history will be declaring they’re not being allowed to speak.

the reality is, they’re loud, they have easier and larger access to more people than anyone ever in history. the reality is also that they’re just mad people speak back to them.

people talking back to them is what they’re really upset about.

honestly i can’t wait for this election cycle to be over.

Post reply on HN