Facebook bans Britain First and its leaders

#1

Post by janeboo » Thu, Mar 15, 2018, 4:47 AM UTC

Facebook bans Britain First and its leaders
theguardian.com

Re: Facebook bans Britain First and its leaders

#2

Post by ganeshkrishnan » Thu, Mar 15, 2018, 6:13 AM UTC

Nice. The paradox of tolerance is that we must always be intolerant of the intolerant.

Re: Facebook bans Britain First and its leaders

#3

Post by Profragile » Thu, Mar 15, 2018, 7:39 AM UTC

ganeshkrishnan wrote: post #2

Nice. The paradox of tolerance is that we must always be intolerant of the intolerant.

So, I guess I should be intolerant of Guardian now.

Re: Facebook bans Britain First and its leaders

#4

Post by martiuk » Thu, Mar 15, 2018, 9:12 AM UTC

Ignorance is bliss. Let's sweep them under the rug.

Re: Facebook bans Britain First and its leaders

#5

Post by vr46 » Thu, Mar 15, 2018, 10:27 AM UTC

About time. Why should criminal activity and harassment be supported? You can have all the rights you're entitled too, provided you don't trample on other people's.

Re: Facebook bans Britain First and its leaders

#6

Post by chopin » Thu, Mar 15, 2018, 10:34 AM UTC

Yeah, while they're at it, could they please ban all political figures? I dislike their positions either.

Re: Facebook bans Britain First and its leaders

#7

Post by chopin » Thu, Mar 15, 2018, 10:36 AM UTC

vr46 wrote: post #5

About time. Why should criminal activity and harassment be supported? You can have all the rights you're entitled too, provided you don't trample on other people's.

So, private entities get to decide what are criminal activities? We live in interesting times, for sure.

Re: Facebook bans Britain First and its leaders

#8

Post by mark_edward » Thu, Mar 15, 2018, 10:42 AM UTC

martiuk wrote: post #4

Ignorance is bliss. Let's sweep them under the rug.

Yes, without the Britain First Facebook page, how will we ever know that xenophobes exist?

Re: Facebook bans Britain First and its leaders

#9

Post by loriverkutya » Thu, Mar 15, 2018, 11:11 AM UTC

chopin wrote: post #7

vr46 wrote: post #5

About time. Why should criminal activity and harassment be supported? You can have all the rights you're entitled too, provided you don't trample on other people's.

So, private entities get to decide what are criminal activities? We live in interesting times, for sure.

Maybe read the article, because the reason for the ban was “repeatedly posted content designed to incite animosity and hatred against minority groups”.

Also currently most of the regulators around the world is pushing facebook to ban hate speech.

Re: Facebook bans Britain First and its leaders

#10

Post by chopin » Thu, Mar 15, 2018, 12:13 PM UTC

loriverkutya wrote: post #9

chopin wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, private entities get to decide what are criminal activities? We live in interesting times, for sure.

Maybe read the article, because the reason for the ban was “repeatedly posted content designed to incite animosity and hatred against minority groups”. Also currently most of the regulators around the world is pushing facebook to ban hate speech.

Care what you wish for. As much as I dislike the content, I will vigorously defend the right for free speech.

That regulators are pushing for it doesn't make it a good thing. What is "hatespeech" anyway? Antisemitism? Mean things about women? Mean things about other people, Reddit is full of it. Who is to decide?

Rule of law requires a clear definition of what is required to be compliant. Please come up with a definition of hatespeech which people can agree upon.

I don't think that suppressing speech is the right way to handle dissent, even in its most appalling forms. This will not make the problem go away but just sweep it under the rug (a bit).