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

Facebook is censoring some posts on Indian Kashmir

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 51 posts

Re: Facebook is censoring some posts on Indian Kashmir

#31

Post by carapace »

themihai wrote: post #11
j0e1 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. But I truly wish there was an open forum that wasn't influenced by government actors and with the same reach as Facebook. Maybe if Wikipedia had discussion rooms which were just as fancy and used by just as many people, it could prove vital during such times.

well.. there are open forums but people want facebook not forums.

Yeah, exactly. The "open forum" is called the Internet.

People choose Facebook.

(I don't like it but it happens organically.)

Re: Facebook is censoring some posts on Indian Kashmir

#32

Post by selimthegrim »

ignoramous wrote: post #19
DixonSeider wrote: post #10

Interesting background on Kashmir: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir#1947_and_1948 Seems a plebiscite was to have taken place but did not happen. I'm guessing the majority would have voted to be part of Pakistan and not part of India. (which would have, of course, irked "minority" populations).

The plebiscite is an outdated demand. A lot of Hindus native to the region were displaced by the insurgency in the 1990s. And the Kashmir Valley which is apparently pro-Pakistan is a smaller region in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. A large part of the State is Buddhist and Hindu.

Don't forget the Shias in Kargil.

Re: Facebook is censoring some posts on Indian Kashmir

#35

Post by dmix »

bitchypat wrote: post #9
ProAm wrote: post #2

Facebook is not a news site, they can censor whatever they want. They are in the advertising sales business they'll tweak their product to maximize the returns on their business.

Yep. And the news sites should report on Facebook's censorship so its users can make informed decisions on how and why they continue to use it. Seems like everything is working appropriately.

Market based equalization provides a balancing force - showing not everything requires gov regulation to correct bad behaviour :)

Their popularity and role in influencing people has resulted in them getting even get more scrutiny than NYTimes and other media outlets who heavily shape and editorialize their coverage.

If FB starts losing money because of outrage brought via media and loss of advertisers, then they will be punished for negative behaviour and work to avoid it.

Otherwise, they own their web properties and are allowed to control the content as they wish.

Re: Facebook is censoring some posts on Indian Kashmir

#36

Post by cardigan »

lazzlazzlazz wrote: post #28
ProAm wrote: post #2

Facebook is not a news site, they can censor whatever they want. They are in the advertising sales business they'll tweak their product to maximize the returns on their business.

As tempting as the "profit motive explains all behavior" argument is, their policy against promoting terrorism explains this adequately.

It's promoting terrorism if you're politically aligned with India.

If you're instead politically aligned with most people living in Kashmir, it's not promoting terrorism, you see it instead as showing solidarity with the cause of freedom. It may be hard to understand, but most of the hundreds of thousands of people protesting in Kashmir right now are not in favor of terrorism. Instead they are incensed by what they see as the decades of Indian oppression and aggression, and Burhan Wani is only used as a symbol of something like "a young son of Kashmir who was driven to madness and made the ultimate sacrifice for freedom".

Facebook's removal of posts is perceived as political censorship by a lot of people politically aligned with Kashmiri independence who are disgusted by terrorism in the same way the US public is.

The Facebook censorship team probably just doesn't have anyone from Kashmir working there, and does not have a good enough grasp of Kashmiri public opinion.

It is really not in line with Facebook's mission of promoting openness to be censoring these posts, and especially to be banning accounts who are posting what they see as legitimate political opinion (when their beliefs and feelings about terrorism are in line with US public opinion)

Re: Facebook is censoring some posts on Indian Kashmir

#37

Post by gb22 »

DixonSeider wrote: post #10

Interesting background on Kashmir: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir#1947_and_1948 Seems a plebiscite was to have taken place but did not happen. I'm guessing the majority would have voted to be part of Pakistan and not part of India. (which would have, of course, irked "minority" populations).

There are multiple legal reasons why plebiscite was never held. Primarily, it required the return of Pakistan occupied kashmir to india for a re-unification of the two kashmirs, as a precondition. Needless to say, Pakistan refused to comply. Additionally, the plebiscite was to be applied to whole of the princely state of Jammu & Kashmir, which includes Aksai Chin territory that China occupied. Besides, Ladakh and Jammu regions would probably be butchered in Pakistan as they are Buddhist and Hindu majority respectively. So there is no question of 2 of the 3 regions accepting to even participate in any plebiscite. Within the muslim 'majority' valley, past surveys have pointed to both possible outcomes -- staying with india or joining pakistan. Too many kashmiri muslims have profited immensely from Indian rule, and fear a punjabi muslim takeover of kashmir were it to join pakistan. Punjabis and Kashmiris are very different people.

Re: Facebook is censoring some posts on Indian Kashmir

#39

Post by patrickmay »

j0e1 wrote: post #7
ProAm wrote: post #2

Facebook is not a news site, they can censor whatever they want. They are in the advertising sales business they'll tweak their product to maximize the returns on their business.

I agree. But I truly wish there was an open forum that wasn't influenced by government actors and with the same reach as Facebook. Maybe if Wikipedia had discussion rooms which were just as fancy and used by just as many people, it could prove vital during such times.

Usenet still exists. It has the same reach as Facebook in terms of availability, but obviously less in terms of participants. I'd love to see it make a resurgence.

Re: Facebook is censoring some posts on Indian Kashmir

#40

Post by ajamesm »

ProAm wrote: post #2

Facebook is not a news site, they can censor whatever they want. They are in the advertising sales business they'll tweak their product to maximize the returns on their business.

I don't think anyone's in dispute as to whether they have the right to "tweak their product" (tweak, censor, curate, take your pick).

But is it a good move to tweak like that? Facebook IS a news site (see: news articles in the right-hand bar), and in fact they're just coming off of allegations that they tweaked news stories to fit their corporate political biases.

If those users start to feel like The Man is out to shape their opinion, and they limit their sharing and participating in response, then Facebook's capability to monetize those users will diminish.

Post reply on HN