3 ms·
"Facebook employees should take some measure of pride in that, he said: "I would urge people not to look at the moral impact of what we do just through the lens
by pwdisswordfish2 6y ago
"Facebook employees should take some measure of pride in that, he said: "I would urge people not to look at the moral impact of what we do just through the lens of harm and mitigation. That's clearly a huge part of what we have to do - I'm not downplaying that. ... But it's also about the upside, and the good, and giving people a voice who wouldn't have previously been able to get into the news and talk about stuff. And having painful things be visible. I think that matters, too."
Employees I spoke with did not seem particularly moved by these answers. "Everyone's grateful we have a chance to address these things directly with him," one told me. "At the same time, no one thinks he gave a single real answer."
Another said Zuckerberg appeared "really scared" on the call. "I think he fears his employees turning on him," the employee said. "At least that's what I got from facial expressions and tone."
At the same time, another employee told me that Zuckerberg's decision was supported by the majority of the company, but that people who agreed with it were afraid to speak out for fear of appearing insensitive. (An employee who spoke on the call echoed this point.)"
So much for "free speech" within Facebook, the company. In this case, "popular opinion" cannot be shared openly.
- fsociety 6y agoFree speech is hard when you watch George Floyd get murdered, anti-racism takes a huge leap at censorship against Trump (and labeling is a form of censorship), and then you’re left justifying why Trump’s horrible message should be left untouched. It’s a scary thing to get labeled as a racist because you defend free speech. I think it illustrates why we should shy away from censorship as much as possible. People here saying that social media companies should be considered a utility once they reach a certain size are very on point. I have zero doubts that the anti-racists would happily advocate for Trump to be cut off from electricity/internet/sewage/water. In some way I agree with them but in another there are healthy methods of activism and unhealthy methods of activism. We shouldn’t be encouraging companies with billions of users to weaponize the unhealthy forms. I am interested to see how many people who want Trump’s post labeled have read about the history of censorship in Europe and China. Christianity used censorship a long time ago and what were the primary principles they believed in? Do onto others as you would do onto yourself, love other people, don’t do drugs or commit adultery. Then when you look into the cracks you can see the crusades they went on and all the horrible things that occurred from it. I hope that isn’t the world we recreate.