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

Facebook’s Secret Rulebook for Global Political Speech

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 207 posts

Re: Facebook’s Secret Rulebook for Global Political Speech

#161

Post by 50656E6973 »

dropit_sphere wrote: post #72
bduerst wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube were completely full of willing listeners for hate speech, then that might be applicable. Hate groups aren't sending private forum messages to each other, they're broadcasting Even John Stuart Mill, a founding philosopher of free speech, postulated that speech needs to be curtailed when the expression harms others.

So this is the thing now? We don't believe freedom of speech is a good thing anymore? Who decided this? I don't recall being consulted on this. Not that I'd think of arguing , mind you! I'm loyal, I swear!

It seems the pushes against freedom of speech ideals in the US greatly increased after the 2016 election, coming mostly from those who share the ideology of the losing party targeting the speech of the winning ideology/party.

Re: Facebook’s Secret Rulebook for Global Political Speech

#162

Post by sjroot »

pjc50 wrote: post #156
scarejunba wrote: post #144

How does everyone have so much trouble with Facebook and Twitter? I have both and have used both for years and I know that both require you to pick what you want to look at. I exhaust my Twitter feed in seconds and then have nothing to look at. Both my FB feed and my Twitter feed are more heartwarming, adorable, funny, or touching than angry or whatever. Maybe all of this is just a reflection of who you guys are. And…

You're not popular enough. > unfollow In the nastier situations, it's not people who you follow that's the problem. It's the people who @ you from a constant stream of new accounts.

Facebook should add a privacy setting that allows you to disable @mentions completely, or limit them to people you have added as a friend. I would not be surprised if this is already a feature.

Re: Facebook’s Secret Rulebook for Global Political Speech

#163

Post by SolaceQuantum »

jlawson wrote: post #106
manicdee wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can choose who to serve in my pub. If you start mouthing off at the other patrons, you will be asked to leave. That is not censorship or silencing, it’s simply advising you that my place is not the place for that kind of behaviour.

If you owned every pub, street, square, coffee shop, theater, restaurant, and other social and public discussion space in the world, do you think it's be fine for you to enforce your arbitrary opinions on everyone in those spaces? What if it's just people discussing things you don't like amongst themselves, with willing speakers and willing listeners?

Facebook does not own every public space. Facebook is not, itself, a public space. If one had to guess at it, I would describe it as perhaps a publically-accessible but privately owned space. Even if one decided to host something that would be allowed in public streets (for example a protest rally) the landowner of the space can still kick you out at any time from their property.

On the internet, if one wants to express hate speech, there are still websites to do so that may not be Facebook.

Re: Facebook’s Secret Rulebook for Global Political Speech

#164

Post by prolikewh0a »

YorkshireSeason wrote: post #147
Godel_unicode wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's constitutionally protected from the government infringing upon it. As Facebook is not the government, they are perfectly free to limit speech in any way they choose.

The article can be read as stating that "[Facebook is an] Unseen Branch of Government"

Social Media will be used to narrow the Overton Window and pull even more rights away and drive society into even further consumerist passivity. They're a private governmet, just like most large corporations now.

https://press.princeton.edu/titles/10938.html

Re: Facebook’s Secret Rulebook for Global Political Speech

#166

Post by 50656E6973 »

rntz wrote: post #80
fromthestart wrote: post #67

We can barely agree on what constitutes hate speech in the U.S.; fb is expecting to define and police hate speech globally?

From Facebook's perspective, what is the alternative? _Not_ trying to define censorship guidelines - and consequently (as we saw in Myanmar) enabling genocide?

>what is the alternative?

How about not having a news feed algorithm and business model that promotes and profits from outrage and negative emotional contagions?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorymcneal/2014/06/28/facebo...

Re: Facebook’s Secret Rulebook for Global Political Speech

#167

Post by 50656E6973 »

mactyler wrote: post #103
hyperdunc wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook thinks it can push its own moral standards for speech on users while at the same time repeatedly compromising the privacy and data of users. And Facebook does this without a hint of recognition that such imposition will be (and already is) being used as a political weapon against dissident voices. That's hubris.

I feel like you’re personifying “facebook” itself a bit as a sole entity when in reality its composed of thousands of individual people each with their own ethics and viewpoints so its not really like those are the same people working on privacy and suppressing hate speech, which I feel like would be somewhat of a necessity for your point. Really, everyone at that company is doing their individual best at their respe…

No, FB is controlled primarily by Mark Zuckerberg, and then secondarily by the Board of Directors.

Major corporate policy such as what we are discussing is dictated by them, in that order.

Re: Facebook’s Secret Rulebook for Global Political Speech

#168

Post by losvedir »

scarejunba wrote: post #144

How does everyone have so much trouble with Facebook and Twitter? I have both and have used both for years and I know that both require you to pick what you want to look at. I exhaust my Twitter feed in seconds and then have nothing to look at. Both my FB feed and my Twitter feed are more heartwarming, adorable, funny, or touching than angry or whatever. Maybe all of this is just a reflection of who you guys are. And…

Yeah, I tend to agree. At some level, I keep coming back to the fact that these are just websites. Like, you can turn off your computer and go for a walk or something.

I don't use facebook or twitter, so I guess that colors my perception as to how trivial they are in the broader picture of life, but it also means I don't totally understand the issues that people who use the sites face.

Re: Facebook’s Secret Rulebook for Global Political Speech

#169

Post by 50656E6973 »

charliebrownau wrote: post #14

Gday Platforms that censor speech:- * Facebook * Twitter * Google * Youtube * TUMBLR * Pateron * Stripe * Paypal * Twitch * Spotify * Apple * pin interest * LinkedIn * Mailchimp * Wordpress * mastodon * azure * Mastercard * Godaddy * MEDIUM * Shopify * Cloudflare * pusher * WIKI * Reddit * teespring * Slack * GOFUNDME

* HN

Re: Facebook’s Secret Rulebook for Global Political Speech

#170

Post by mark_l_watson »

pjc50 wrote: post #156
scarejunba wrote: post #144

How does everyone have so much trouble with Facebook and Twitter? I have both and have used both for years and I know that both require you to pick what you want to look at. I exhaust my Twitter feed in seconds and then have nothing to look at. Both my FB feed and my Twitter feed are more heartwarming, adorable, funny, or touching than angry or whatever. Maybe all of this is just a reflection of who you guys are. And…

You're not popular enough. > unfollow In the nastier situations, it's not people who you follow that's the problem. It's the people who @ you from a constant stream of new accounts.

I was wondering about the @ thing. There is a strange account that keeps @ my account name and a few other people in my field whose names I recognize. I would like to be able to disable that.
Post reply on HN