3 ms·
> Once they do that, Facebook promises, by June, that this will inform the Facebook's algorithm so that it will stop being preferred to show on people's newsfee
by komali2 7y ago
> Once they do that, Facebook promises, by June, that this will inform the Facebook's algorithm so that it will stop being preferred to show on people's newsfeed, but it's not censorship. If you look specifically for that friend, that post is still there, but they have a warning that says it's already fact-checked as false.
That'd be very interesting if the Taiwanese government was in direct communication with Facebook over something like this. CPJ wasn't able to get a hold of Facebook, I wonder if anyone here has visibility into something like that? Given that the US government took a more "combative" approach (dragging executives in front of Congress) I'd be curious how more tame approaches like this were being received.
- gdhbcc 7y agoIt is censorship though. Part of the job of the censor is to determine whether the likelyhood some information will be seen, justifies the censorship in question. You can read the censor reports from the estado novo for example, and in many of them the censor declined to ban the book because even though it was objectively illegal, it would naturally be a book that wouldn't be sought after by the general public, and so only those who knew about it would look for it. I'd say this is an even more pernicious form of censorship because you dont know what you dont know.
- freeflight 7y agoIt should be noted that dragging executives in front of Congress might not have been received well, but it did "its job" by nudging these companies into expanding their outsourced moderation practices to topics important to the US government [0], without the US government itself being too directly involved. [0] https://youtu.be/iGCGhD8i-o4 https://youtu.be/iGCGhD8i-o4