3 ms·

The FBI (government) told Facebook (private company) to censor things that aren't illegal, and they did. In this case, social media === government for all inten

by fein 4y ago

The FBI (government) told Facebook (private company) to censor things that aren't illegal, and they did. In this case, social media === government for all intents and purposes.

jliptzin 4y ago
“Basically, the background here is the FBI basically came to us, some folks on our team, and was like, ‘Hey, just so you know you should be on high alert,’ ” said Zuckerberg. “ ‘We thought there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election, we have it on notice that basically there’s about to be some kind of dump that’s similar to that so just be vigilant.’ ” "Facebook did not completely ban sharing of the article, but instead limited how much its algorithm automatically shared it to other people for a week, while third-party fact-checkers tried to verify the reporting." https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62688532 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62688532 https://nypost.com/2022/08/28/fbi-put-the-hunter-biden-story-right-in-facebooks-lap/ https://nypost.com/2022/08/28/fbi-put-the-hunter-biden-story...
- fein 4y ago
  Which means FB has a working relationship with the FBI doing whatever the FBI says without asking questions. FBI didn't tell them to censor the fake piss dossier on Trump, and that was 100% bullshit. Along comes a Biden run for president, and real, legitimate, truthful damaging information about Biden's entire degenerate family gets suppressed. BIG HMMMMMMM.
  - jliptzin 4y ago
    You're saying Trump's DOJ and FBI threatened FB with _______ unless they blocked the spread of the Hunter Biden laptop story? FB didn't even ban the story though? Even if FB is suppressing information at the request of the FBI, there are hundreds of other news sources out there that people can use. I don't use Facebook, especially not for news consumption. Here's a more concrete example: Trump's DOJ threatened FB with removal of section 230 protection, or complete shutdown in Twitter's case, unless they stop censoring news stories that these companies believe to be false or misleading. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattperez/2020/05/28/trump-signs-executive-order-attempting-to-restrict-rights-of-internet-companies-like-twitter/#558e86a3463a https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattperez/2020/05/28/trump-sign... Private companies should be free to allow or disallow whatever they want at their discretion on their private platforms, left or right. If I owned a social media platform, I would also probably block stories that I think are false, because I don't think that being known as a platform for the spread of misinformation would be good for my brand. I don't complain about Facebook or Twitter's censorship, and I don't complain about Truth Social or Parler, all are private companies that can do what they want as far as I'm concerned. I don't get my news from any of those sources, no one should.
    - fein 4y ago
      > You're saying Trump's DOJ and FBI threatened FB with _______ unless they blocked the spread of the Hunter Biden laptop story? Where on earth did you get that from? FB is in cahoots with the FBI (and ADL), period. FB has a censorship regime that massively favors one set of politics, which is guided by the FBI, ADL, and probably many other political orgs we don't even hear about.
      - jliptzin 4y ago
        Isn't that what you were insinuating? In any case, I agree with you that FB is in cahoots with the FBI. FB has a ton of juicy information that the FBI would love to get their hands on. But getting back to the topic at hand, this looks like a case of "you scratch our back I'll scratch yours," not government censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop story which the FBI would have no incentive to do, especially under Trump. FB wants to remove disinformation from their platform (or at least appear like they're making an effort), and the FBI wants a friendly relationship with FB so they can lean on them for whatever data they need. I really don't get the arguments that there is government censorship going on when the Hunter Biden laptop story was one of the most widely publicized stories of 2020 available on pretty much every news outlet nationwide.

by fein 4y ago

The FBI (government) told Facebook (private company) to censor things that aren't illegal, and they did. In this case, social media === government for all intents and purposes.

jliptzin 4y ago

“Basically, the background here is the FBI basically came to us, some folks on our team, and was like, ‘Hey, just so you know you should be on high alert,’ ” said Zuckerberg. “ ‘We thought there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election, we have it on notice that basically there’s about to be some kind of dump that’s similar to that so just be vigilant.’ ” "Facebook did not completely ban sharing of the article, but instead limited how much its algorithm automatically shared it to other people for a week, while third-party fact-checkers tried to verify the reporting." https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62688532 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62688532 https://nypost.com/2022/08/28/fbi-put-the-hunter-biden-story-right-in-facebooks-lap/ https://nypost.com/2022/08/28/fbi-put-the-hunter-biden-story...

fein 4y ago
Which means FB has a working relationship with the FBI doing whatever the FBI says without asking questions. FBI didn't tell them to censor the fake piss dossier on Trump, and that was 100% bullshit. Along comes a Biden run for president, and real, legitimate, truthful damaging information about Biden's entire degenerate family gets suppressed. BIG HMMMMMMM.
- jliptzin 4y ago
  You're saying Trump's DOJ and FBI threatened FB with _______ unless they blocked the spread of the Hunter Biden laptop story? FB didn't even ban the story though? Even if FB is suppressing information at the request of the FBI, there are hundreds of other news sources out there that people can use. I don't use Facebook, especially not for news consumption. Here's a more concrete example: Trump's DOJ threatened FB with removal of section 230 protection, or complete shutdown in Twitter's case, unless they stop censoring news stories that these companies believe to be false or misleading. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattperez/2020/05/28/trump-signs-executive-order-attempting-to-restrict-rights-of-internet-companies-like-twitter/#558e86a3463a https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattperez/2020/05/28/trump-sign... Private companies should be free to allow or disallow whatever they want at their discretion on their private platforms, left or right. If I owned a social media platform, I would also probably block stories that I think are false, because I don't think that being known as a platform for the spread of misinformation would be good for my brand. I don't complain about Facebook or Twitter's censorship, and I don't complain about Truth Social or Parler, all are private companies that can do what they want as far as I'm concerned. I don't get my news from any of those sources, no one should.
  - fein 4y ago
    > You're saying Trump's DOJ and FBI threatened FB with _______ unless they blocked the spread of the Hunter Biden laptop story? Where on earth did you get that from? FB is in cahoots with the FBI (and ADL), period. FB has a censorship regime that massively favors one set of politics, which is guided by the FBI, ADL, and probably many other political orgs we don't even hear about.
    - jliptzin 4y ago
      Isn't that what you were insinuating? In any case, I agree with you that FB is in cahoots with the FBI. FB has a ton of juicy information that the FBI would love to get their hands on. But getting back to the topic at hand, this looks like a case of "you scratch our back I'll scratch yours," not government censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop story which the FBI would have no incentive to do, especially under Trump. FB wants to remove disinformation from their platform (or at least appear like they're making an effort), and the FBI wants a friendly relationship with FB so they can lean on them for whatever data they need. I really don't get the arguments that there is government censorship going on when the Hunter Biden laptop story was one of the most widely publicized stories of 2020 available on pretty much every news outlet nationwide.