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

711–720 of 903 posts

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

#711

Post by iudqnolq »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #571
mongol wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No not neccessarily. There are many examples of peoples who have wished their lands to become liberated from current rulers. I am for example thinking of Finland or the Baltics. It wasn't hateful of them to wish for that, and I never heard anyone even express that idea. There are ways to express hate, but this is not one of them.

The difference between Finland liberating from Russian rule vs Palestina liberating from Israel rule (geographically the whole of Israel "from the river to the sea") is that there weren't a huge amount of Russians living in Finland when Finland was liberated. But for Palestine there is. What is your solution to the "jewish problem", and is it a final solution? Please do elaborate how your genocide does not violate th…

A brief perusal of Finnish history will show you a series of mass deportations and concentration camps by both sides.

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

#712

Post by havelhovel »

mvuijlst wrote: post #689
welzel wrote: post #634

Sometimes i feel that reporters should be needed to add a basic statistical analysis before they are allowed to claim something like censorship. How much content is posted every day on meta? How many content removal decisions are taken every day by meta? Hint: Over 1 billion Stories are posted every day. So even if 1049 content removals would happen on a single day - but this "evidence" is collected over a much longe…

Well, yes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Israel , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_United_States_for... etc. Does the existence of these Wikipedia articles now mean that I can call any information put out by Israel or the United States "biased content" and just disregard it?

No. The comment you're replying to explicitly calls out the poor methodology this report is based on and the lack of subject matter expertise shown by the authors. The Wikipedia article is supplementary information that situates this critique within a wider context. They are not saying you should dismiss the report simply because of the Wikipedia article.

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

#713

Post by __loam »

Qiu_Zhanxuan wrote: post #672
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…

Seems you haven't read the actual report, HRW clearly points inconsistencies in the application of Meta's policies that amounts to censorship of any support to Palestine.

I've seen reports of hate speech in Hebrew getting a pass while Arabic users are having rules enforced in an overly broad way. Regardless of your views on the conflict, it is a bit chilling that a massive corporation is now the arbiter of speech for much of the internet now.

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

#714

Post by aspenmayer »

dang wrote: post #663
CommanderData wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I respect that you've commented. It was something I upvoted. I checked through my upvoted submissions at the time and could no longer find it which was a first for me as either would expect it to have been flagged or deleted but shown. I remember being a little shocked when it was on the front page and shortly after was not. I've checked again from <4 months. Wonder if anyone else can recall the URL - I just remember…

I wonder if you mean https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38036236 ? You'd need to turn showdead on in your profile to see that one. I'm pretty sure that the code that decides whether or not to display a [dead] post doesn't consider whether the user had upvoted the post before it became [dead]. Maybe it would be better if it did.

> I'd like to know which HN post you're talking about, so I can say exactly what happened.

> I wonder if you mean https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38036236? You'd need to turn showdead on in your profile to see that one.

So, what happened?

Edit: I can't even click the link on the post you mentioned. Is that normal? That seems especially suspect and somewhat closer to censoring opposing views than I've come to expect from you and HN, Dan.

I have showdead enabled.

The link in question:

https://twailr.com/public-statement-scholars-warn-of-potenti...

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

#715

Post by dctoedt »

porkbeer wrote: post #401
api wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there was an effort to rehabilitate it (as in the Dukes of Hazzard) as a symbol of anti-authoritarianism Never got that one. Nothing like the flag of a breakaway state founded to preserve chattel slavery as a symbol of… anti-authoritarianism?

It's known as the 'Rebel Flag' in the united states, and has indeed stood for being a rebel with none of the modern racist associations attaced to it. Many of your favorite antiracist rock stars of the 60s sported the flag. People under 40 mostly just know the culture-war version where its akin to a swastika, which itself originally had a different meaning. Symbols change, you have to view them through the lens of hi…

> has indeed stood for being a rebel with none of the modern racist associations attaced [sic] to it

I grew up partly in the South of the civil rights era and went to one de-facto segregated school. (Dad was military, stationed in various places.) I was a kid, but I paid attention to the news, and my impression was that racism was the clear, undeniable subtext to the "being a rebel" part: Many Southerners — notably, most of those who held political- and economic power — resented federal "interference" with "Southern ways," namely the violent oppression of blacks to keep them as an impoverished, powerless, underclass workforce.

(In 2020 I read a tweet thread from an anonymous Army officer, recapping the history of post-Civil War Reconstruction and the Union's de facto surrender in 1877; the quote that stuck with me was, "Sherman should've mowed the deep south like a lawn, making multiple passes")

https://twitter.com/pptsapper/status/1313470161974947843

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

#716

Post by __loam »

mrpopo wrote: post #520
Tostino wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes... You had plenty of people saying "this is going to be your own version of Afghanistan/Iraq if you decide to do what you want to do..." Israel wanted revenge, not a solution. Their strategy has guaranteed that there will be another cycle of violence as the kids that grew up seeing their parents blown up in airstrikes are understandably going to be ripe for recruiting into whatever organization steps into power i…

It's simply their strategy, really. Turning Palestinians desperate so they turn to violence ("terrorism"), in order to justify turning their territory into even more of a shit hole, so Palestinians who can't take it anymore will emigrate, until the "problem" is gone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing

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

#717

Post by jfqwoeif »

kemayo wrote: post #195
fwefqf wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

October 7th did pretty notably feature a massacre of young people at a music festival, and some widespread killing of civilians at multiple different villages. Are you employing some non-standard definition of "target" or of "civilian"? Claiming Hamas didn't do any of that?

[flagged]

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

#719

Post by qwertthrowway »

rayiner wrote: post #693
qwertthrowway wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 Palestin…

The objective is an end to occupation, this is about establishing justice. it would be narrow minded and misguided to claim this is not about human rights and dignity first and foremost, which is a component of justice. People take solidarity with those being oppressed and wronged. The Israeli occupation and oppression of Palestine has been occurring for over 70 years now, and worldwide this is a galvanizing topic especially considering the major uptick in atrocities committed by the Israeli government and indiscriminate targeting of civilians.

The issue with Rohingya people is also an issue that people take solidarity with and partake in aid of.

I see your comment as dismissing the desire to establish justice in Palestine as if it is only about fighting Jews for being Jewish. Many people also protested the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, which now in the US we recognize as being based on wrong premises. Apartheid was supported by many people but now it is regarded as a dark time in history.

If you wish to be on the side of ignoring the need for justice, know that you won’t be the first to do so. But it does not make it the correct thing to do.

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

#720

Post by pvg »

aspenmayer wrote: post #714
dang wrote: post #663

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if you mean https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38036236 ? You'd need to turn showdead on in your profile to see that one. I'm pretty sure that the code that decides whether or not to display a [dead] post doesn't consider whether the user had upvoted the post before it became [dead]. Maybe it would be better if it did.

> I'd like to know which HN post you're talking about, so I can say exactly what happened. > I wonder if you mean https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38036236 ? You'd need to turn showdead on in your profile to see that one. So, what happened? Edit: I can't even click the link on the post you mentioned. Is that normal? That seems especially suspect and somewhat closer to censoring opposing views than I've come to ex…

So, what happened?

Very likely flagged dead by users, as most things that show up as [flagged][dead]

Is that normal?

It is for dead submissions. Has been the case for ages.

Post reply on HN