3 ms·
Fact is the argument works both ways. A person can't stay logically consistent while saying "it's a private company they can do what they want" in the case of
by ravenstine 5y ago
Fact is the argument works both ways. A person can't stay logically consistent while saying "it's a private company they can do what they want" in the case of politics but then denouncing that same company when it takes an adverse action purely out of its own interest.
I, for one, don't hate Facebook. Facebook, Instagram, and all of it is a reflection of society. Naturally we're pretty slow to react to any problem, so it's taken this long for a larger fragment of society to accept that social media is a problem. The next step is for all of us to admit that Zuck & co. aren't the real bad guys; while they profiteer off the psychological warfare (profiteers will always exist), we spent years falling for their tactics over and over. Fool us dozens of times, shame on us.
- ImPostingOnHN 5y agothey're being criticized for their hypocrisy, not for doing anything they're legally disallowed from doing thus, they can do whatever they want, including banning racists and hiding secret internal research showing they're amplifying racists, but only the second one is hypocritical given their claimed (almost satirically so, at this point) values of safety-before-profit
- el_ravager 5y agoFacebook is a merely the logical consequence of late-stage capitalism—its evil nature is a feature not a bug.