4 ms·

Anyone with a modicum of sense has been saying this should happen for years now.

signal11 6y ago
Well, do democratic values (and facts, really) matter more than the sweet, sweet engagement metrics and ad revenue Mr Zuckerburg gets from the MAGA crowd? Sorry if this comes across as bitter. I’m very disappointed at how the large social networks’ have conducted themselves at this point to the point that for a large swathe of the US and the UK, the facts don’t matter any more.
tolbish 6y ago
This ban rings hollow. You're 100% correct that Trump has been provoking violence for years now (e.g. "If she [Hillary] gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks...although the Second Amendment people ... maybe there is" / "When the looting starts, the shooting starts"). Zuckerberg just knows now that Democrats will be in power so this is a safe move to appear like he hasn't been perfectly fine helping Trump increase the spread of his violent platform ("Facebook cannot be the arbiter of truth"). It was all about allowing "engagement" that helped Facebook's revenue. Zuckerberg does not get to change the narrative now.
- drak0n1c 6y ago
  Those statements you gave as examples weren’t so clear cut. The first was in the context of talking about court cases that the judges will see. It was probably referencing 2A legal defense and litigator orgs like the NRA and GOA. The second example capped off a paragraph about curfew measures to prevent daytime protests from being overtaken by nighttime looting. Therefore it could be an empirical statement about tragedies that tend to and have followed looting and is using that to justify his preventive measures. If he meant it normatively and wanted to shoot people he probably wouldn’t have pushed preventative measures.
  - nobody9999 6y ago
    >The second example capped off a paragraph about curfew measures to prevent daytime protests from being overtaken by nighttime looting. Therefore it could be an empirical statement about tragedies that tend to and have followed looting and is using that to justify his preventive measures. If he meant it normatively and wanted to shoot people he probably wouldn’t have pushed preventative measures. The second example was a blatantly racist dog whistle[0]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_the_looting_starts,_the_shooting_starts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_the_looting_starts,_the_s...

Well, do democratic values (and facts, really) matter more than the sweet, sweet engagement metrics and ad revenue Mr Zuckerburg gets from the MAGA crowd? Sorry if this comes across as bitter. I’m very disappointed at how the large social networks’ have conducted themselves at this point to the point that for a large swathe of the US and the UK, the facts don’t matter any more.

tolbish 6y ago

This ban rings hollow. You're 100% correct that Trump has been provoking violence for years now (e.g. "If she [Hillary] gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks...although the Second Amendment people ... maybe there is" / "When the looting starts, the shooting starts"). Zuckerberg just knows now that Democrats will be in power so this is a safe move to appear like he hasn't been perfectly fine helping Trump increase the spread of his violent platform ("Facebook cannot be the arbiter of truth"). It was all about allowing "engagement" that helped Facebook's revenue. Zuckerberg does not get to change the narrative now.

drak0n1c 6y ago
Those statements you gave as examples weren’t so clear cut. The first was in the context of talking about court cases that the judges will see. It was probably referencing 2A legal defense and litigator orgs like the NRA and GOA. The second example capped off a paragraph about curfew measures to prevent daytime protests from being overtaken by nighttime looting. Therefore it could be an empirical statement about tragedies that tend to and have followed looting and is using that to justify his preventive measures. If he meant it normatively and wanted to shoot people he probably wouldn’t have pushed preventative measures.
- nobody9999 6y ago
  >The second example capped off a paragraph about curfew measures to prevent daytime protests from being overtaken by nighttime looting. Therefore it could be an empirical statement about tragedies that tend to and have followed looting and is using that to justify his preventive measures. If he meant it normatively and wanted to shoot people he probably wouldn’t have pushed preventative measures. The second example was a blatantly racist dog whistle[0]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_the_looting_starts,_the_shooting_starts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_the_looting_starts,_the_s...