3 ms·

So... Zuckerberg should fund a coup in Turkey? There's an easy common argument for these things: restricted mass information/communication is better than none,

So... Zuckerberg should fund a coup in Turkey? There's an easy common argument for these things: restricted mass information/communication is better than none, or better than the lower amount you'd get with a home-grown platform. Seems a pretty good argument to me.

aranelsurion 6y ago
One could look for good arguments to frame this in a better way, though I believe there might be a simpler way to explain: follow the money. Companies and people in the West don't care what happens elsewhere, they're just in for the money. There's money to be made in Turkey as well, and Facebook doesn't care about specifics of how. For the common people this all sounds fair and strategic on the surface level, though I'm skeptical of its sustainability. Just like how it's hard to be rich in a poor and sketchy neighbourhood, it could be hard to remain a free state in a planet where many of your neighbours aren't.
- carmen_sandiego 6y ago
  It's possible that the choice that enriches Facebook is also good for other parties. Whether they even care about the latter or not.
- notsureaboutpg 6y ago
  Do you realize that Facebook started off blocking and removing "terrorist" content in the US first and foremost? There are many groups and parties that only the US considers terrorists (maybe along with it's weaker allies only), especially various groups affiliated with Iran. And Facebook needs to block the speech of those groups in the US as well to comply with US law.
postingawayonhn 6y ago
As a product of the United States you would hope that they would stand up for freedom of speech/expression as much as possible and take a principled stand occasionally.
- nindalf 6y ago
  There's a thin line between taking a principled stand and forcefully exporting your values to some other culture. For example, Germany outlaws Holocaust denial. It's not a crime in the US. Should Facebook follow German laws by taking down posts denying the Holocaust? Obviously they should follow local laws, most of us would agree. Here's the thing - there's only two principled stands here. Either tech giants always follow US law exclusively, forcing it on every country in the world OR they follow local laws as applicable, even if they don't agree with the laws. If a person says that following Turkish law outlawing the YPG isn't ok but following the German Holocaust law is, that's inconsistent.
  - true_religion 6y ago
    Tech giants can’t force anything on anyone without being enabled by the local government. If Facebook does not follow German law, Germany will ban it and seize its German assets to pay the fines it owes.
    - nindalf 6y ago
      That's fine. So the same thing applies to Turkish law?
- carmen_sandiego 6y ago
  Given they can't change the government of Turkey, I would think maximizing the speech given to Turks within those constraints _is_ standing up for freedom of speech/expression. In theory, Facebook and others are subject to the same laws as a local company would be. In my experience (in China) though, what actually happens is the local companies will be much stricter, pre-emptively crushing speech they consider just 'risky' rather than actually illegal. Western companies, whose execs are somewhat insulated from local pressures, tend to do better. But only if they're allowed in the country in the first place, which means they have to commit to a certain minimum level of adherence.
mhh__ 6y ago
There is no simple solution here, and we also really shouldn't just throw our arms when faced with moral questions - this is probably what these decades will be known for in the future.

aranelsurion 6y ago

One could look for good arguments to frame this in a better way, though I believe there might be a simpler way to explain: follow the money. Companies and people in the West don't care what happens elsewhere, they're just in for the money. There's money to be made in Turkey as well, and Facebook doesn't care about specifics of how. For the common people this all sounds fair and strategic on the surface level, though I'm skeptical of its sustainability. Just like how it's hard to be rich in a poor and sketchy neighbourhood, it could be hard to remain a free state in a planet where many of your neighbours aren't.

carmen_sandiego 6y ago
It's possible that the choice that enriches Facebook is also good for other parties. Whether they even care about the latter or not.
notsureaboutpg 6y ago
Do you realize that Facebook started off blocking and removing "terrorist" content in the US first and foremost? There are many groups and parties that only the US considers terrorists (maybe along with it's weaker allies only), especially various groups affiliated with Iran. And Facebook needs to block the speech of those groups in the US as well to comply with US law.

postingawayonhn 6y ago

As a product of the United States you would hope that they would stand up for freedom of speech/expression as much as possible and take a principled stand occasionally.

nindalf 6y ago
There's a thin line between taking a principled stand and forcefully exporting your values to some other culture. For example, Germany outlaws Holocaust denial. It's not a crime in the US. Should Facebook follow German laws by taking down posts denying the Holocaust? Obviously they should follow local laws, most of us would agree. Here's the thing - there's only two principled stands here. Either tech giants always follow US law exclusively, forcing it on every country in the world OR they follow local laws as applicable, even if they don't agree with the laws. If a person says that following Turkish law outlawing the YPG isn't ok but following the German Holocaust law is, that's inconsistent.
- true_religion 6y ago
  Tech giants can’t force anything on anyone without being enabled by the local government. If Facebook does not follow German law, Germany will ban it and seize its German assets to pay the fines it owes.
  - nindalf 6y ago
    That's fine. So the same thing applies to Turkish law?
carmen_sandiego 6y ago
Given they can't change the government of Turkey, I would think maximizing the speech given to Turks within those constraints _is_ standing up for freedom of speech/expression. In theory, Facebook and others are subject to the same laws as a local company would be. In my experience (in China) though, what actually happens is the local companies will be much stricter, pre-emptively crushing speech they consider just 'risky' rather than actually illegal. Western companies, whose execs are somewhat insulated from local pressures, tend to do better. But only if they're allowed in the country in the first place, which means they have to commit to a certain minimum level of adherence.

mhh__ 6y ago

There is no simple solution here, and we also really shouldn't just throw our arms when faced with moral questions - this is probably what these decades will be known for in the future.