4 ms·

Not everyone (me included) believes the censorship he's calling for is the right thing.

by brink 6y ago

badrabbit 6y ago
Do you have a better solution? And are you aware that no action means people will die and global economy as a whole might crumble?
- programmarchy 6y ago
  Without censorship, people will die and the global economy might crumble? Seems like a very odd conclusion. Besides, the global economy in its current form is completely unsustainable. I understand the importance of racial justice, but are you saying somehow the global economy (I read that as multinational capitalism) is some vanguard of this principle?
  - badrabbit 6y ago
    If someone is actively coordinating to an end that will result in people dying, should you not censor? Why have a mechanism to censor to begin with? > I understand the importance of racial justice, but are you saying somehow the global economy (I read that as multinational capitalism) is some vanguard of this principle? This has nothing to do with racial justice. Continued unrest, rioting,etc... Will enable a steeper curve for the 2nd wave of Corona. No bailout or any government measure will help. The US economy will not collapse by itself, jusr like in 2008 it will affect the global economy. This is the 11th hour! Facebook is enabling all this. I understand if they had an unmoderated platform, but they moderate plenty! In the end the consequence is something you must acknowledge at least as a possibility when saying "censor things but not nazis and race war propaganda" This isn't about censorship,it's about policy. Do you also oppose fact checking? FB does!! > Besides, the global economy in its current form is completely unsustainable. So we should let it collapse? And how many wars and famine should be tolerated? I am all for change but not the "watch the world burn" kind of change. P.S.: Please lookup the meetings between Zuckerberg and republican leadership this year. This is strictly about politics,not censorship.
thinkharderdev 6y ago
Great. People are allowed to disagree. He should be applauded though for actually putting his money where his mouth is.
rorykoehler 6y ago
What do you think is the right thing?
commandlinefan 6y ago
I really worry about where this is going. I think about Howard Stern moving over to Sirius satellite radio - as quaint as it seems in today's climate, he was at least as controversial (although in command of fewer armies) as Donald Trump is. The people who hated him then hated him as much, if not more, than the people who hate Donald Trump do now. I imagine some people quit Sirius in protest, but for the most part, people separated their own preferences from their jobs AND accepted that just because somebody isn't their own cup of tea doesn't mean that they shouldn't be anybody's cup of tea. This ideological purity test has me worried, though - I can easily imagine that the Trump-haters will view anybody who stayed at FB and opposed arbitrary censorship in an "if you're not with us, you're against us" way and blacklist ex-FB employees for not joining this guy. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind, but that seems to be what a disturbing number of people are hoping for.
- dpau 6y ago
  bad analogy. trump has far, far greater power than any talk show host and is advocating violence against americans.
FabHK 6y ago
Let's just be a bit careful with nomenclature here - when a private company doesn't print or publish or promote certain messages, that's not censorship. (Let alone when they carry it, but add a link.) I'm also against censorship. "Deplatforming" or something similar might be more appropriate here.
landryraccoon 6y ago
Facebook already censors. They already make editorial decisions regarding content. For example, content of a sexual nature is completely banned and gets you blocked on the platform. Racism and inciting violence get a pass, but post a woman breast feeding? You're gone in a flash. The free speech argument has no weight because Facebook already doesn't respect it.

Not everyone (me included) believes the censorship he's calling for is the right thing.

by brink 6y ago

Not everyone (me included) believes the censorship he's calling for is the right thing.

Do you have a better solution? And are you aware that no action means people will die and global economy as a whole might crumble?

programmarchy 6y ago
Without censorship, people will die and the global economy might crumble? Seems like a very odd conclusion. Besides, the global economy in its current form is completely unsustainable. I understand the importance of racial justice, but are you saying somehow the global economy (I read that as multinational capitalism) is some vanguard of this principle?
- badrabbit 6y ago
  If someone is actively coordinating to an end that will result in people dying, should you not censor? Why have a mechanism to censor to begin with? > I understand the importance of racial justice, but are you saying somehow the global economy (I read that as multinational capitalism) is some vanguard of this principle? This has nothing to do with racial justice. Continued unrest, rioting,etc... Will enable a steeper curve for the 2nd wave of Corona. No bailout or any government measure will help. The US economy will not collapse by itself, jusr like in 2008 it will affect the global economy. This is the 11th hour! Facebook is enabling all this. I understand if they had an unmoderated platform, but they moderate plenty! In the end the consequence is something you must acknowledge at least as a possibility when saying "censor things but not nazis and race war propaganda" This isn't about censorship,it's about policy. Do you also oppose fact checking? FB does!! > Besides, the global economy in its current form is completely unsustainable. So we should let it collapse? And how many wars and famine should be tolerated? I am all for change but not the "watch the world burn" kind of change. P.S.: Please lookup the meetings between Zuckerberg and republican leadership this year. This is strictly about politics,not censorship.

thinkharderdev 6y ago

Great. People are allowed to disagree. He should be applauded though for actually putting his money where his mouth is.

rorykoehler 6y ago

What do you think is the right thing?

commandlinefan 6y ago

I really worry about where this is going. I think about Howard Stern moving over to Sirius satellite radio - as quaint as it seems in today's climate, he was at least as controversial (although in command of fewer armies) as Donald Trump is. The people who hated him then hated him as much, if not more, than the people who hate Donald Trump do now. I imagine some people quit Sirius in protest, but for the most part, people separated their own preferences from their jobs AND accepted that just because somebody isn't their own cup of tea doesn't mean that they shouldn't be anybody's cup of tea. This ideological purity test has me worried, though - I can easily imagine that the Trump-haters will view anybody who stayed at FB and opposed arbitrary censorship in an "if you're not with us, you're against us" way and blacklist ex-FB employees for not joining this guy. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind, but that seems to be what a disturbing number of people are hoping for.

dpau 6y ago
bad analogy. trump has far, far greater power than any talk show host and is advocating violence against americans.

FabHK 6y ago

Let's just be a bit careful with nomenclature here - when a private company doesn't print or publish or promote certain messages, that's not censorship. (Let alone when they carry it, but add a link.) I'm also against censorship. "Deplatforming" or something similar might be more appropriate here.

landryraccoon 6y ago

Facebook already censors. They already make editorial decisions regarding content. For example, content of a sexual nature is completely banned and gets you blocked on the platform. Racism and inciting violence get a pass, but post a woman breast feeding? You're gone in a flash. The free speech argument has no weight because Facebook already doesn't respect it.