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

Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 903 posts

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#691

Post by bsaul »

ethanbond wrote: post #670
bsaul wrote: post #658

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you grant protesters far too much common sense. What i'm saying isn't theoretical : as a recent example, here in paris a feminist movement protesting in support of palestinians women under bombing explicitly rejected from the march women that came to protest against the raping of israelis women ( and hostages ). Another recent example in Paris as well is the number of people removing "free the hostages" poste…

Okay let’s take the protest example. There are a few possible explanations. 1. These protestors are actually pro raping Israelis 2. These protestors want a single, specific priority for the protest they organized And you believe not just that (1) is more likely, but that there’s so little possibility of (2) that you can just discard their entire perspective and accuse them of supporting rape of Israelis without even…

I believe 3/ those people are caught in their own self contradictions. They hate israel so much that they're actually sorting between women that got killed for the wrong reasons and women that got killed and raped because they somehow deserved it.

Which is an absolutely horrible stance for a feminist organization. But that's where ideology leads to.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#692

Post by zarzavat »

mgraczyk wrote: post #425
calamari4065 wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were you measuring what users like , or what they "engage" with ? If I see a post on mastodon, it's from someone I follow or a post that someone I follow thought was worth sharing. That's a genuine interaction between humans. I get to decide what's in my feed based on who I follow and the filters I set up. The system is designed only to connect me with people I choose to follow. Meanwhile, an algorithmic feed with no…

We ran lots of experiments, including asking people survey questions, monitoring usage, asking people offline to try both, etc You're wrong about the design of algorithmic feeds. I worked on them, that's not how we designed them.

How about giving the people the option and letting them decide for themselves.

Also, 20% of people is hundreds of millions of people.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#693

Post by rayiner »

qwertthrowway wrote: post #638
rayiner wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For example, the phrase "from the river to the see" is considered hateful by many The phrase has its origins in Arab nationalism. It was coined in 1960 by the PLO to refer to the goal of an Arab state that occupies the entirety of what was Mandatory Palestine. If you ignore the subtext of “what happens to the Jews in that situation” I suppose you can make a case for it. It’s like the confederate flag. In the 20th c…

This is a very inaccurate comparison. Palestinians faced the violent expulsion of the Nakbah, and before that in the British mandate period there were attacks from violent Zionist groups. Currently, Palestine is militarily occupied and colonized. In this context, from the river to the sea must be understood as a desire for freedom and for justice. The oppression faced under occupation by people in the West Bank and i…

Muslims conquered that land to begin with, so that’s kind of an important bit of context for everything that follows.

And the antipathy in the rest of the Muslim world is mostly about hating Jews. In Bangladesh, where I’m from, people aren’t marching for justice for the Rohingya being genocided by Myanmar—even though Rohingya are closely related to Bangladeshis. But there are huge protests in the streets for Palestinians. What is the explanation for why people would be so much more concerned about a “human rights” issue involving a far away, distantly related people, in comparison to the amount of concern for the human rights issue happening to a closely related people next door? Because it’s not really about “human rights,” it’s about a Muslim solidarity against Jews.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#694

Post by mgraczyk »

zarzavat wrote: post #692
mgraczyk wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We ran lots of experiments, including asking people survey questions, monitoring usage, asking people offline to try both, etc You're wrong about the design of algorithmic feeds. I worked on them, that's not how we designed them.

How about giving the people the option and letting them decide for themselves. Also, 20% of people is hundreds of millions of people .

People have the option, you can choose to use a chronological feed on Facebook and Meta

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#695

Post by aspenmayer »

nox100 wrote: post #491
slim wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

removal of content is really like 10% of the cases. the most worrisome type of suppression of speech is what they call "shadow banning" which is really "reach limiting". to the extent people now refrain from using the word "Palestine" to avoid metas algirithms. I experienced this myself. We have a draft law in parliament concerning boyocott of israel. I posted a status about the law (notice it's unrelated to war or a…

I posted 2 things recently. One was link to a game, another to an anime (neither related in any way shape or form to wars nor any news or politics what-so-ever. I got zero responses, not even likes/hearts/laughs. So I assumed FB decided not to show them to any of my friends. "Zero reach". How do you know the reason for your reason for zero reach is any different than mine? I assumed Meta's algo decided none of my fri…

I have heard from others that link posts are somehow downranked on many social media platforms (not just Meta, but especially FB/IG). This is why many people recommend instead text posts without a link, with a callout to a second post containing a "link in comments." This seems common on YouTube community posts also.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#696

Post by cultofmetatron »

krembo wrote: post #671
cultofmetatron wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if this is intentionally obtuse but its TRIVIALLY easy to find examples and journalistic documentaries demonstrating the apartheid going back years just of the top of my head, there are already seperate roads that palestinians are not allowed to go on. palestinians have to go through multiple checkpoints just to travel within their own territory. palestinians are tried in a separate military court with a…

If they need to go thru checkpoints then they are not trespassing their territory. If that's the definition for apartheid then the US border control with Mexico should be taken down for second thoughts.

> If they need to go thru checkpoints then they are not trespassing their territory.

literally 2 seconds of googling can disprove that

https://www.btselem.org/freedom_of_movement/checkpoints_and_...

> If they need to go thru checkpoints then they are not trespassing their territory.

if there was just one checkpoint between gaza and israel, yes that would be accurate but its not.

last I checked, Mexicans don't have to pass though US checkpoints when they travel from tulum to cancun or mexico city.

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#697

Post by gershy »

zen_1 wrote: post #624
zo1 wrote: post #603

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I'm not sure how we can start a peace process after the terrorist atrocities that were committed? At this point I think the best is to just evacuate all Palestinians to the rest of the Arab countries as refugees and then just leave the contested territory as unoccupied and "dmz" like for both sides. And honestly where tf is the UN in all of this?

> Honestly I'm not sure how we can start a peace process after the terrorist atrocities that were committed? Israel somehow managed to convince other arab states and the US to make peace after the Lavon Affair and USS Liberty incidents, I'm sure they can manage to find some equivalent forgiveness in their hearts this time around :) > At this point I think the best is to just evacuate all Palestinians to the rest of t…

I think anyone who's read about the lavon affair and the uss liberty will laugh at the comparison to oct. 7th

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#698

Post by Slava_Propanei »

mgraczyk wrote: post #336

Interestingly if you read the actual report from HRW, it sounds like most of the material they are referring too was legitimately taken down because it supported violence, according to Meta's policies. For example, the phrase "from the river to the see" is considered hateful by many, so it was taken down. In other cases the content praised attacks by Hamas, which is designated as a terrorist organization by the US go…

[dead]

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#699

Post by Slava_Propanei »

krembo wrote: post #525
mongol wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why "From the river to the see" would be hateful in isolation. Certainly some people who say it may have hateful thoughts in their minds, but wishing for palestinian land where Israel is now is not hateful in itself.

Don't you really understand why it's an hateful speech when you wish my country stop to exists?

[dead]

Re: Meta censors pro-Palestinian views on a global scale, report claims

#700

Post by ethanbond »

bsaul wrote: post #691
ethanbond wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay let’s take the protest example. There are a few possible explanations. 1. These protestors are actually pro raping Israelis 2. These protestors want a single, specific priority for the protest they organized And you believe not just that (1) is more likely, but that there’s so little possibility of (2) that you can just discard their entire perspective and accuse them of supporting rape of Israelis without even…

I believe 3/ those people are caught in their own self contradictions. They hate israel so much that they're actually sorting between women that got killed for the wrong reasons and women that got killed and raped because they somehow deserved it. Which is an absolutely horrible stance for a feminist organization. But that's where ideology leads to.

Did they say that? Or are you just assuming?
Post reply on HN