4 ms·

If I’m not mistaken, since politicians usually avoid objective statements — such that they could be construed as truth or lie depending on your point of view —

by mikece 7y ago

If I’m not mistaken, since politicians usually avoid objective statements — such that they could be construed as truth or lie depending on your point of view — for Facebook to get into the censorship business would be a signal that they aren’t an open platform and they would become liable for any lies or harmful information they missed. And it’s money: as Zuckerberg said on Capitol Hill, Facebook makes money by selling ads. Specifically, they can charge a premium for targeted ads because they know so damned much about everyone on their platform. Want to blast an ad to promote your campaign to everyone? Standard CPM rates apply. Want to target left-handed hikers who drive a GMC truck, are allergic to penicillin, like Reggae music and NHL hockey? Facebook can give you that list almost instantly but it’s going to cost a LOT more than the standard CPM to run those ads to that group. THIS ability is what makes Facebook so valuable to advertisers and to Facebook shareholders.

antris 7y ago
They already deal with censorship on a variety of categories where the line between acceptable and unacceptable are blurred. Nudity, hate speech, targeting, harassment, all kinds of illegal / semi-illegal trade and activity happening in various groups throughout the platform etc. No moderation can ever be perfectly objective and no platform cannot be completely open for all kinds of content, unless it's structured like Tor. And we all know what happens at Tor.
- mikece 7y ago
  Yes, if they detect something illegal they remove it. Perhaps "censorship" was the wrong word. If they begin establishing the precedent they will censor or editorialize content which isn't illegal (all of the things you mentioned) then I think they become legally liable for things they don't edit, like slander which is a matter for civil rather than criminal courts (at least in the US).
- lol2143651 7y ago
  All of those topics are not nearly as significant (or controversial) as political censorship.

by mikece 7y ago

antris 7y ago

They already deal with censorship on a variety of categories where the line between acceptable and unacceptable are blurred. Nudity, hate speech, targeting, harassment, all kinds of illegal / semi-illegal trade and activity happening in various groups throughout the platform etc. No moderation can ever be perfectly objective and no platform cannot be completely open for all kinds of content, unless it's structured like Tor. And we all know what happens at Tor.

mikece 7y ago
Yes, if they detect something illegal they remove it. Perhaps "censorship" was the wrong word. If they begin establishing the precedent they will censor or editorialize content which isn't illegal (all of the things you mentioned) then I think they become legally liable for things they don't edit, like slander which is a matter for civil rather than criminal courts (at least in the US).
lol2143651 7y ago
All of those topics are not nearly as significant (or controversial) as political censorship.