5 ms·

If someone came into your house and shouted rasist lies you're within your rights to kick them out. Free speech relates to protecting people from the government

by maym86 8y ago

If someone came into your house and shouted rasist lies you're within your rights to kick them out. Free speech relates to protecting people from the government punishing or silencing people for what they say. It doesn't apply in the same way to private spaces or platforms. It's entirely reasonable to not provide a platform for antisemitism or other hate speech especially if it's reducing the quality of the platform for other users. Edit: clarity

merpnderp 8y ago
But this isn't someone's house. This is a public square where nearly everyone is invited to speak, and also given tools to block people they don't want to hear. And I never spoke about the 1st Amendment or any of the free speech laws, but of governing principles of the United States - that Democracy only works when all voices are heard. People who don't have a voice might decide this whole Democracy thing isn't working for them and decide they should be heard through violence. And we had 300,000 years of that shit. Democracy is mind boggling special considering our history and every effort should be made to make sure everyone has a seat at the table. And like it or not, Facebook is one of the most important tables these days. Bad ideas should be discussed publicly so that all can see the arguments against. Covering up/hiding such speech doesn't end that speech, it just makes sure that those who believe it never hear a refutation.
- maym86 8y ago
  It's not a public square. It's a private platform that already censors people for other reasons, often to do with making profit. There are low hanging fruit that have been discussed and we know the the answer, e.g. holocaust denial, where the content is just designed to hurt others. Why bother having that discussion over and over and trying to convince trolls and racists? Don't give them a platform to waste everyone's time. Do you think Facebook should allow paid antisemitic advertising on the platform? https://boingboing.net/2015/11/06/facebook-is-censoring-links-to.html https://boingboing.net/2015/11/06/facebook-is-censoring-link... https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2016/10/12/13241486/facebook-censorship-breast-cancer-nipple-mammogram https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2... https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/11/facebook-censorship-news-feed-trending-topics https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/11/facebook-...
bena 8y ago
No. The First Amendment deals with the government punishing or silencing people for what they say. Free speech is a concept relating to the ability to articulate and express an opinion without fear of censorship or retaliation. I do not put forward the position that my house allows free speech to everyone. However, that person is well within their rights to go out into the streets and yell their positions at the top of their lungs. And I will support him in that. And I will decry any platform that purports to allow free speech but then censors a person. But I'm also ok with someone creating a platform that doesn't allow for all speech. That falls under freedom of association. Are you seeing just how complicated all of this is now?
- maym86 8y ago
  > Are you seeing just how complicated all of this is now? Yes, you just repeated what I said. I think you replied to the wrong comment :)
  - snerbles 8y ago
    It looks like you completely missed the point of non-governmental entities abiding by the principle of free speech: > Free speech relates to the government punishing or silencing people for what they say. Versus: > Free speech is a concept relating to the ability to articulate and express an opinion without fear of censorship or retaliation.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - maym86 8y ago
      As a whole bena's post agrees with what I was saying as long as you understand Facebook is a private platform. Facebook doesn't provide a platform that allows free speech. It has censored people for business reasons for years. Do you think Facebook should allow paid antisemitic advertising on the platform?
      - 8y ago

by maym86 8y ago

merpnderp 8y ago

But this isn't someone's house. This is a public square where nearly everyone is invited to speak, and also given tools to block people they don't want to hear. And I never spoke about the 1st Amendment or any of the free speech laws, but of governing principles of the United States - that Democracy only works when all voices are heard. People who don't have a voice might decide this whole Democracy thing isn't working for them and decide they should be heard through violence. And we had 300,000 years of that shit. Democracy is mind boggling special considering our history and every effort should be made to make sure everyone has a seat at the table. And like it or not, Facebook is one of the most important tables these days. Bad ideas should be discussed publicly so that all can see the arguments against. Covering up/hiding such speech doesn't end that speech, it just makes sure that those who believe it never hear a refutation.

maym86 8y ago
It's not a public square. It's a private platform that already censors people for other reasons, often to do with making profit. There are low hanging fruit that have been discussed and we know the the answer, e.g. holocaust denial, where the content is just designed to hurt others. Why bother having that discussion over and over and trying to convince trolls and racists? Don't give them a platform to waste everyone's time. Do you think Facebook should allow paid antisemitic advertising on the platform? https://boingboing.net/2015/11/06/facebook-is-censoring-links-to.html https://boingboing.net/2015/11/06/facebook-is-censoring-link... https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2016/10/12/13241486/facebook-censorship-breast-cancer-nipple-mammogram https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2... https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/11/facebook-censorship-news-feed-trending-topics https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/11/facebook-...

bena 8y ago

No. The First Amendment deals with the government punishing or silencing people for what they say. Free speech is a concept relating to the ability to articulate and express an opinion without fear of censorship or retaliation. I do not put forward the position that my house allows free speech to everyone. However, that person is well within their rights to go out into the streets and yell their positions at the top of their lungs. And I will support him in that. And I will decry any platform that purports to allow free speech but then censors a person. But I'm also ok with someone creating a platform that doesn't allow for all speech. That falls under freedom of association. Are you seeing just how complicated all of this is now?

maym86 8y ago
> Are you seeing just how complicated all of this is now? Yes, you just repeated what I said. I think you replied to the wrong comment :)
- snerbles 8y ago
  It looks like you completely missed the point of non-governmental entities abiding by the principle of free speech: > Free speech relates to the government punishing or silencing people for what they say. Versus: > Free speech is a concept relating to the ability to articulate and express an opinion without fear of censorship or retaliation.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - maym86 8y ago
    As a whole bena's post agrees with what I was saying as long as you understand Facebook is a private platform. Facebook doesn't provide a platform that allows free speech. It has censored people for business reasons for years. Do you think Facebook should allow paid antisemitic advertising on the platform?
    - 8y ago