The bigger question is, will they also ban content that would be construed as hate speech if you simply replaced the words “white people” with “[!white] people”?
Came here to say this. You can't have it both ways.
Facebook to ban white nationalist content
11–20 of 1001 posts
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#12Good to see the Valley is starting to get off its "we are just a platform, all information should be free and neutral no matter how bad, so we're not responsible" extremism of the past few years and understand that some forms of speech are harmful should not ever be encouraged and accelerated on any platform or technology, ever. To the people that say "Where does it end?" – that's pretty easy. Let's start with curbin…
> To the people that say "Where does it end?" – that's pretty easy. Let's start with curbing speech that encourages harming others.
This may come as a surprise to you, but this response will not be comforting to those with genuine concerns about civil liberties. Avoiding the question of where to draw the final line with the question of where to draw the first one just implies that you intend to draw more lines in the future.
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#13This is good. I am, though, concerned about the negative externalities that could arise. Will this lead to new and stranger commercial activities?
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#14It wasn't banned already? What the hell?
From TFA:
> Our policies have long prohibited hateful treatment of people based on characteristics such as race, ethnicity or religion – and that has always included white supremacy. We didn’t originally apply the same rationale to expressions of white nationalism and separatism because we were thinking about broader concepts of nationalism and separatism – things like American pride and Basque separatism, which are an important part of people’s identity.
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#15Good to see the Valley is starting to get off its "we are just a platform, all information should be free and neutral no matter how bad, so we're not responsible" extremism of the past few years and understand that some forms of speech are harmful should not ever be encouraged and accelerated on any platform or technology, ever. To the people that say "Where does it end?" – that's pretty easy. Let's start with curbin…
The only reason the valley has trumpeted the "we're just a platform" is that it was better for the bottom line and shareholders. Now it no longer is.
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#16I'd encourage people to please read the post before they comment. It seems that this isn't actually Facebook targeting a specific ideology, it is removing a previous rule that excluded that ideology:
> We didn’t originally apply the same rationale to expressions of white nationalism and separatism because we were thinking about broader concepts of nationalism and separatism – things like American pride and Basque separatism, which are an important part of people’s identity.
I've been plenty critical of Facebook in the past, but this post is refreshingly honest. I hope it's followed up by some discernible results.
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#17The bigger question is, will they also ban content that would be construed as hate speech if you simply replaced the words “white people” with “[!white] people”?
Facebook's rules have always been a bit bizarre here.
https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-hate-speech-cens...
> One document trains content reviewers on how to apply the company’s global hate speech algorithm. The slide identifies three groups: female drivers, black children and white men. It asks: Which group is protected from hate speech? The correct answer: white men.
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#18Why not ban all racism, all hate, everything? Doing just one is PR only.
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#19I don't know as much about hate as I should, perhaps, but it seems arbitrary to make rules about what's hate and what's not.
This part, especially, from the article... We also need to get better and faster at finding and removing hate from our platforms. Over the past few years we have improved our ability to use machine learning and artificial intelligence to find material from terrorist groups. Last fall, we started using similar tools to extend our efforts to a range of hate groups globally, including white supremacists. We’re making progress, but we know we have a lot more work to do.
My question is, how are you going to know when you're done? What would Facebook look like if they didn't have any more work to do on hate? I'm honestly asking this.
Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content
#20Good to see the Valley is starting to get off its "we are just a platform, all information should be free and neutral no matter how bad, so we're not responsible" extremism of the past few years and understand that some forms of speech are harmful should not ever be encouraged and accelerated on any platform or technology, ever. To the people that say "Where does it end?" – that's pretty easy. Let's start with curbin…
If this sort of thing leads to Section 230 repeal though, are we really any better off?