34 ms·

The outrage in this thread doesn't make sense to me. This is how advertising works, it's a business decision based on business interests, Verizon doesn't care a

The outrage in this thread doesn't make sense to me. This is how advertising works, it's a business decision based on business interests, Verizon doesn't care about any of this one way or another, they are simply taking a stance based on pressure from their customers. What so many of you flippantly dismiss as an outrage mob is a coalition of concerned citizens who believe Facebook is wrong for allowing dishonest political content to disseminate unchecked. It's fine to disagree, but just repeating "censorship" is not convincing, other values exist and compete with the human right to shit-post on social media.

asdfasdf12124 6y ago
I would never suggest that HN is being astro-turfed by FB, because even suggesting so will get your account banned. But, it would be neat to have a dataset of anonymized users/ip/votes to run analysis on. Again, not suggesting this forum has been influenced by sock-puppets. I wouldn't dare.
MaximumYComb 6y ago
I don't think people are asking for a FB boycott over "dishonesty", despite the way it is being framed. You literally have organisations like Sleeping Giants whose mission is to convince sponsors to dump sites that host conservative content. The current Facebook boycott is Stop Hate For Profit and is focused around hate speech (using the definition of hate speech as defined by the left). I lean quite heavily left, I'm Australian and my political compass aligns me the most with our Greens party. I follow news sources from both the left and the right and it seems very obvious that the left is asking for some double standards. Twitter is celebrated online for being woke yet no one sees anything wrong with them for allowing people to commit assault and share it on their platform [1]. I actually find the current US political climate quite worrying, one side is being completely silenced in the mainstream media. I think Democracy needs to have multiple voices. I hope people turn out and vote in the coming US elections because I suspect the Trump voters are going to come in huge numbers. The conditions of one side being silenced are very similar to 2016. ALL the polls showed a landslide for Hillary because people were too scared to admit they were going to vote Trump. [1] - https://twitter.com/tariqnasheed/status/1273092750699720709 https://twitter.com/tariqnasheed/status/1273092750699720709
- qPM9l3XJrF 6y ago
  Voting for Trump would be a big mistake for many reasons. First, he's a terrible prez. But second, if Biden the "compromise candidate" loses, that empowers voices on the left who say "See? We need a radical like Bernie to fire people up!"
- nl 6y ago
  Australia, left leaning. I think Twitter's response generally on speech has been terrible. Putting a label on a couple of Trump tweets doesn't fix that when they always move second to ban bot nets after Facebook discovers them, or to remove people who call for violence (eg the Alex Jones Sandy Hook conspiracy theory). > ALL the polls showed a landslide for Hillary No they didn't. The ones that were incorrect (state polls in a few states) were all within 3% of the correct outcome, with margin of errors of around 2%. Just because some bad modellers used that to make "Hillary is 99% likely to win" doesn't mean the polling showed a landslide. That national polling was almost exactly correct.
- root_axis 6y ago
  > You literally have organisations like Sleeping Giants whose mission is to convince sponsors to dump sites that host conservative content So what? There are a lot of controversial political organizations out there, corporations don't have to listen to them unless they feel it is in their best interest as a business. > I follow news sources from both the left and the right and it seems very obvious that the left is asking for some double standards. I think that's fair criticism, but twitter has a stated desire to draw the line somewhere, so if you disagree with where they draw it I think it's fair to call them out or ask them to do better, but just keep in mind that fairness is an impossible ask, so imperfect moderation that incrementally improves is the best we can hope for on that website. Yet, I'd suggest we not hope for anything and just let twitter be twitter, there are many better places to be on the internet. Certainly, the conversation we're having right now would be impossible on twitter. > Twitter is celebrated online for being woke yet no one sees anything wrong with them for allowing people to commit assault and share it on their platform The only people celebrating twitter's wokeness is twitter, everyone else just rolls their eyes because twitter is a self-indulgent dramafest with very little in the way of productive discourse, it is perhaps the popular platform least suitable to substantive discussion due to the mechanics of the site. > https://twitter.com/tariqnasheed/status/1273092750699720709 https://twitter.com/tariqnasheed/status/1273092750699720709 I don't see the problem from twitter's perspective. Yeah, I agree it's assault, but the poster didn't commit the assault as your phrasing suggests, it's a video of a real event and there is a discussion about the event with a diversity of opinions represented in the comments. > I actually find the current US political climate quite worrying, one side is being completely silenced in the mainstream media. It's simply false to state that conservatives are being "completely silenced". Every influential conservative you can name has millions of followers on twitter and there are many millions of conservative users all over twitter which is obvious to anyone who has ever used it. Yes, there are more liberals on twitter, but you can't blame them for simply existing on the website in those numbers, if the site is too woke for your tastes just don't use it. > I think Democracy needs to have multiple voices. Conservatives overwhelmingly control the federal government and state governments around the country, so I find it difficult to seriously entertain the idea that leftist bias on twitter represents a threat to the conservative voice in democracy. > The conditions of one side being silenced are very similar to 2016 People see what they want to see, conservatives are more influential now than at any other time in the last 50 years > ALL the polls showed a landslide for Hillary because people were too scared to admit they were going to vote Trump. The polls were more or less correct, Hillary Clinton received millions of more votes than Trump, it is only that Clinton's complacency provided Trump's campaign with the opportunity to outmaneuver her in critical swing states, Trump managed to achieve the unlikely odds, but they were still unlikely, it's an open secret that even Trump himself mostly expected to lose.
jaekash 6y ago
> What so many of you flippantly dismiss as an outrage mob is a coalition of concerned citizens who believe Facebook is wrong for allowing dishonest political content to disseminate unchecked. So "hate speech" is a synonym for "dishonest political content"? Or are we maybe talking about different things here. And just repeating "hate speech" is not convincing either, other values exist and compete with the "human right" to not be offended.
- marcinzm 6y ago
  >to not be offended If you think this is about being offended then I feel sad for your limited world view. This is a mix of people not wanting politics to be controlled by external state actors and people not wanting acts of violence to be pushed for. The later leads to people getting actually hurt and killed. Avoiding that tends to be a value that most place rather highly.
  - jaekash 6y ago
    > This is a mix of people not wanting politics to be controlled by external state actors and people not wanting acts of violence to be pushed for. Democrats in the US is actively calling for violence and endorsing riots and insurrection. Nobody cares about violence. It is a lie.
apostacy 6y ago
At what point would you say Facebook is big enough that they need to be regulated? In The Philippines, Facebook has a de-facto monopoly on communication. There are only two major cellphone companies (Globe and Smart), and they essentially just act as last-mile providers for Facebook. Both networks are unreliable, so everyone just has two sim cards. Nobody texts, everyone just uses Facebook messenger and voice chat. Facebook even subsidizes free cellphone plans with access just to Facebook services. City municipal services were all available primarily via Facebook in the city I stayed in. Cellphone numbers are seen as disposable, especially because the networks are so unreliable. Because nobody else can afford to subsidize the phone companies, nobody can compete with Facebook. Facebook has an incredible amount of power. They can interfere in elections, and put people out of business with the push of a button. They could hold the entire country hostage. Is it ok to regulate them then? Or should these leviathan corporations be treated like scrappy startups still?

asdfasdf12124 6y ago

I would never suggest that HN is being astro-turfed by FB, because even suggesting so will get your account banned. But, it would be neat to have a dataset of anonymized users/ip/votes to run analysis on. Again, not suggesting this forum has been influenced by sock-puppets. I wouldn't dare.

MaximumYComb 6y ago

I don't think people are asking for a FB boycott over "dishonesty", despite the way it is being framed. You literally have organisations like Sleeping Giants whose mission is to convince sponsors to dump sites that host conservative content. The current Facebook boycott is Stop Hate For Profit and is focused around hate speech (using the definition of hate speech as defined by the left). I lean quite heavily left, I'm Australian and my political compass aligns me the most with our Greens party. I follow news sources from both the left and the right and it seems very obvious that the left is asking for some double standards. Twitter is celebrated online for being woke yet no one sees anything wrong with them for allowing people to commit assault and share it on their platform [1]. I actually find the current US political climate quite worrying, one side is being completely silenced in the mainstream media. I think Democracy needs to have multiple voices. I hope people turn out and vote in the coming US elections because I suspect the Trump voters are going to come in huge numbers. The conditions of one side being silenced are very similar to 2016. ALL the polls showed a landslide for Hillary because people were too scared to admit they were going to vote Trump. [1] - https://twitter.com/tariqnasheed/status/1273092750699720709 https://twitter.com/tariqnasheed/status/1273092750699720709

qPM9l3XJrF 6y ago
Voting for Trump would be a big mistake for many reasons. First, he's a terrible prez. But second, if Biden the "compromise candidate" loses, that empowers voices on the left who say "See? We need a radical like Bernie to fire people up!"
nl 6y ago
Australia, left leaning. I think Twitter's response generally on speech has been terrible. Putting a label on a couple of Trump tweets doesn't fix that when they always move second to ban bot nets after Facebook discovers them, or to remove people who call for violence (eg the Alex Jones Sandy Hook conspiracy theory). > ALL the polls showed a landslide for Hillary No they didn't. The ones that were incorrect (state polls in a few states) were all within 3% of the correct outcome, with margin of errors of around 2%. Just because some bad modellers used that to make "Hillary is 99% likely to win" doesn't mean the polling showed a landslide. That national polling was almost exactly correct.
root_axis 6y ago
> You literally have organisations like Sleeping Giants whose mission is to convince sponsors to dump sites that host conservative content So what? There are a lot of controversial political organizations out there, corporations don't have to listen to them unless they feel it is in their best interest as a business. > I follow news sources from both the left and the right and it seems very obvious that the left is asking for some double standards. I think that's fair criticism, but twitter has a stated desire to draw the line somewhere, so if you disagree with where they draw it I think it's fair to call them out or ask them to do better, but just keep in mind that fairness is an impossible ask, so imperfect moderation that incrementally improves is the best we can hope for on that website. Yet, I'd suggest we not hope for anything and just let twitter be twitter, there are many better places to be on the internet. Certainly, the conversation we're having right now would be impossible on twitter. > Twitter is celebrated online for being woke yet no one sees anything wrong with them for allowing people to commit assault and share it on their platform The only people celebrating twitter's wokeness is twitter, everyone else just rolls their eyes because twitter is a self-indulgent dramafest with very little in the way of productive discourse, it is perhaps the popular platform least suitable to substantive discussion due to the mechanics of the site. > https://twitter.com/tariqnasheed/status/1273092750699720709 https://twitter.com/tariqnasheed/status/1273092750699720709 I don't see the problem from twitter's perspective. Yeah, I agree it's assault, but the poster didn't commit the assault as your phrasing suggests, it's a video of a real event and there is a discussion about the event with a diversity of opinions represented in the comments. > I actually find the current US political climate quite worrying, one side is being completely silenced in the mainstream media. It's simply false to state that conservatives are being "completely silenced". Every influential conservative you can name has millions of followers on twitter and there are many millions of conservative users all over twitter which is obvious to anyone who has ever used it. Yes, there are more liberals on twitter, but you can't blame them for simply existing on the website in those numbers, if the site is too woke for your tastes just don't use it. > I think Democracy needs to have multiple voices. Conservatives overwhelmingly control the federal government and state governments around the country, so I find it difficult to seriously entertain the idea that leftist bias on twitter represents a threat to the conservative voice in democracy. > The conditions of one side being silenced are very similar to 2016 People see what they want to see, conservatives are more influential now than at any other time in the last 50 years > ALL the polls showed a landslide for Hillary because people were too scared to admit they were going to vote Trump. The polls were more or less correct, Hillary Clinton received millions of more votes than Trump, it is only that Clinton's complacency provided Trump's campaign with the opportunity to outmaneuver her in critical swing states, Trump managed to achieve the unlikely odds, but they were still unlikely, it's an open secret that even Trump himself mostly expected to lose.

jaekash 6y ago

> What so many of you flippantly dismiss as an outrage mob is a coalition of concerned citizens who believe Facebook is wrong for allowing dishonest political content to disseminate unchecked. So "hate speech" is a synonym for "dishonest political content"? Or are we maybe talking about different things here. And just repeating "hate speech" is not convincing either, other values exist and compete with the "human right" to not be offended.

marcinzm 6y ago
>to not be offended If you think this is about being offended then I feel sad for your limited world view. This is a mix of people not wanting politics to be controlled by external state actors and people not wanting acts of violence to be pushed for. The later leads to people getting actually hurt and killed. Avoiding that tends to be a value that most place rather highly.
- jaekash 6y ago
  > This is a mix of people not wanting politics to be controlled by external state actors and people not wanting acts of violence to be pushed for. Democrats in the US is actively calling for violence and endorsing riots and insurrection. Nobody cares about violence. It is a lie.

apostacy 6y ago

At what point would you say Facebook is big enough that they need to be regulated? In The Philippines, Facebook has a de-facto monopoly on communication. There are only two major cellphone companies (Globe and Smart), and they essentially just act as last-mile providers for Facebook. Both networks are unreliable, so everyone just has two sim cards. Nobody texts, everyone just uses Facebook messenger and voice chat. Facebook even subsidizes free cellphone plans with access just to Facebook services. City municipal services were all available primarily via Facebook in the city I stayed in. Cellphone numbers are seen as disposable, especially because the networks are so unreliable. Because nobody else can afford to subsidize the phone companies, nobody can compete with Facebook. Facebook has an incredible amount of power. They can interfere in elections, and put people out of business with the push of a button. They could hold the entire country hostage. Is it ok to regulate them then? Or should these leviathan corporations be treated like scrappy startups still?