3 ms·
That’s a sad idea of powerlessness. It’s also wrong: Facebook doesn’t have a competitor in its core market, and the idea that people would start thinking “you
by matt4077 9y ago
That’s a sad idea of powerlessness.
It’s also wrong: Facebook doesn’t have a competitor in its core market, and the idea that people would start thinking “you know, Facebook is great. But I just wish there were a platform just like it with a bit more calls to violence against minority groups” is ludicrous.
- pjc50 9y agoIronically that seems to have happened with reddit - there are a couple of competitors which are "just like it with a bit more calls to violence against minority groups".
- matt4077 9y agoAnd they are completely irrelevant and have nowhere near the reach and influence that posts on reddit have, nicely proving my point. The content on these sites is also so far away from common decency that people will not the mistake of thinking that messages they read there are acceptable in common discourse.
- laurent123456 9y agoThose responsible for the propaganda against the Rohingya used the radio before, now they use Facebook and after that they'll use something else. Education and a proper government that would censor the hate groups could help solve the problems in Myanmar, but eg shutting down Facebook would not change anything.
- shaki-dora 9y ago> shutting down Facebook would not change anything. You’re just asserting this without any argument, even though it was addressed in the post you’re responding to. What would be used instead of Facebook? If that other platform is as convenient and effective as FB, why is it not used today? And since you are agreeing that censorship of hate could help: why do you believe the appropriate distribution of the responsibility for such censorship is more important than stopping a genocide?