Live data from Hacker News

Facebook to Remove Misinformation That Leads to Violence

nytimes.com

11–20 of 71 posts

Re: Facebook to Remove Misinformation That Leads to Violence

#11
The only thing that can and ought to be realistically removed is illegal speech and SCOTUS has already defined what that is... Any other attempts, while well intentioned, will probably backfire. FB seems to take one step forward and two steps back each time they try to take some moral high ground when it comes to free speech... I like the fact they recently increased transparency behind who is paying for ads - whether they are advertising fake or true info, the reader gets to decide what's veritable vs what isn't ultimately, as it should be. Now, they will "identify misinformation".. in other words, they will appoint themselves as adjudicators of what is truth (e.g. "mis-information") vs what is not... they are a medium for free speech - not a scientific, peer-review type of website where consensus kills off or approves publishing of content.

This continuous grasping at straws by FB, Twitter, google, whomever really - of determining what is acceptable in the realm of opinion/1st Amendment speech is really exhausting and will mean the death of their platforms.

Re: Facebook to Remove Misinformation That Leads to Violence

#12
post #8
post #6

"FB has said it will create partnerships with local civil society groups to identify misinformation" Thank goodness FB is not the real Internet. Imagine winding up on the wrong side of a secret rule-making group who marks your free speech as unacceptable.

Imagine winding up on the wrong side of a lynch mob that Facebook abets. Actually, you don't need to imagine, this happens every once in a while in India. If Facebook wants to be responsible for curating content on their platforms (Which they absolutely do, wrt, say, pornography, stalking, harassment, etc), then they can't shirk that responsibility, either.

This article isn't about any of the examples you just listed, which are already policed by Facebook and, you know, the actual police.

Re: Facebook to Remove Misinformation That Leads to Violence

#14
post #9

Censorship is wrong, it's impossible for anyone to have an unbiased opinion.

Totally unbiased? Correct, that's impossible. Unbiased enough to approximately block calls for violence from all sides? That's realistically possible.

Re: Facebook to Remove Misinformation That Leads to Violence

#15
post #9

Censorship is wrong, it's impossible for anyone to have an unbiased opinion.

Totally unbiased? Correct, that's impossible. Unbiased enough to approximately block calls for violence from all sides? That's realistically possible.

What do you define as "unbiased enough"?

Re: Facebook to Remove Misinformation That Leads to Violence

#16
It seems like our current laws already cover the dangerous stuff that needs to be taken down.

If someone makes an explicit call to violence, that is already illegal and should be covered under our existing laws.

No need to change any policies when the existing policies work well enough for stopping the obviously dangerous content.

Re: Facebook to Remove Misinformation That Leads to Violence

#17
"Leads to"

Anyone can claim anything leads to anything. This is nothing but a blanket censorship policy for Facebook to stifle any speech it wants and claim that it could possibly have led to violence, which is entirely impossible to prove or disprove. Not at all surprising give the track record of Facebook.

Re: Facebook to Remove Misinformation That Leads to Violence

#19
post #9

Censorship is wrong, it's impossible for anyone to have an unbiased opinion.

Totally unbiased? Correct, that's impossible. Unbiased enough to approximately block calls for violence from all sides? That's realistically possible.

Explicit calls to violence are already against the law.

We have good laws that cover these situations already.

Re: Facebook to Remove Misinformation That Leads to Violence

#20
post #9

Censorship is wrong, it's impossible for anyone to have an unbiased opinion.

Totally unbiased? Correct, that's impossible. Unbiased enough to approximately block calls for violence from all sides? That's realistically possible.

They don't say they are blocking calls to violence. They say they are going to block anything could that lead to violence, which could be anything. Anything that could potentially get anyone angry about anything could theoretically "lead to" violence as a result - that's what makes this policy so absurd.
Post reply on HN