4 ms·
This is absurd...he was clear the first time and clear the second time. I don’t think he was even close to ambiguous about his position on the holocaust. Howev
by iambateman 8y ago
This is absurd...he was clear the first time and clear the second time. I don’t think he was even close to ambiguous about his position on the holocaust.
However, the real issue is that a company controlled by a single CEO is allowed to make broad social value judgments about what is and is not free speech. Facebook is as close to a public forum as any, and it’s dangerous to assume they will always keep an open semi-libertarian approach to speech.
- thatswrong0 8y agoI don’t know, it sounds like he’s trying to not judge as much as possible, only removing posts actively promoting harm or harassing. And what’s the alternative to Zuck? Should Facebook be controlled by the U.S. government? A panel of elders? When is it okay to dismantle a company in these such cases? Who makes _that_ judgment?