4 ms·

Meta bans RT and other Russian state-linked media networks

12 points by anigbrowl 2y ago

hulitu 2y ago
[flagged]
- legacynl 2y ago
  > Controlling the internet you mean Facebook and Instagram?
- d3vmax 2y ago
  There has to be a fine line between blatant misinformation and social content. Internet is now a matured technology and now (Social Media, esp.) is easily exploited by various entities. You should read up a bit more on this, rather than blaming META. Our way of life and trust in institutions is under threat due to blatant abuses by Russia. They were also paying $100,000 per video to influencers to create distrust in everything.
  - NackerHughes 2y ago
    Misinformation from one country is allowed, misinformation from another country isn't. How do we know for sure that the news outlets from Western countries are actually telling the truth about what's going on, and aren't just making things up or lying by omission? And how long until Meta and other social media giants start banning news outlets that they personally disagree with - that is, if they aren't already? They are no better than the corrupt dictatorships they claim to be protecting us from.
    - hulitu 2y ago
      > Misinformation from one country is allowed, misinformation from another country isn't. How do we know for sure that the news outlets from Western countries are actually telling the truth about what's going on, and aren't just making things up or lying by omission? You never know for sure. But now, they are trying to "help you". /s
  - hulitu 2y ago
    > You should read up a bit more on this, rather than blaming META. Cambridge analytica ? /s
troyvit 2y ago
I think there's a difference between blaming Meta for blocking what it considers blatant misinformation and the effect that these large entities have on speech overall. It's worth exploring in the same way that Brazil's banning of X is, as well as X's labeling of NPR as "U.S. state-affiliated media". Some of these moves show what happens when a private organization is treated like a core service or utility (NPR leaving X doesn't seem to have had much of an effect on anybody). Nobody will grumble if your local Mastodon instance blocks RT, because nobody treats Mastodon as a necessary piece of infrastructure. Russia's response of "Such selective actions against Russian media are unacceptable. ... This complicates prospects for normalising our relations with Meta." is hilarious because they're just gonna have to accept it because (drum-roll) Meta _is_ a private organization and isn't beholden to any b.s. from anybody as far as what audience they want to serve. I also learned via the article that Russia has banned Instagram and Facebook since 2022. I'm a little surprised they didn't think there would be parity there. It's about the amount of influence over global communication that one entity has, and what that entity should look like.

12 points by anigbrowl 2y ago

hulitu 2y ago

[flagged]

legacynl 2y ago
> Controlling the internet you mean Facebook and Instagram?
d3vmax 2y ago
There has to be a fine line between blatant misinformation and social content. Internet is now a matured technology and now (Social Media, esp.) is easily exploited by various entities. You should read up a bit more on this, rather than blaming META. Our way of life and trust in institutions is under threat due to blatant abuses by Russia. They were also paying $100,000 per video to influencers to create distrust in everything.
- NackerHughes 2y ago
  Misinformation from one country is allowed, misinformation from another country isn't. How do we know for sure that the news outlets from Western countries are actually telling the truth about what's going on, and aren't just making things up or lying by omission? And how long until Meta and other social media giants start banning news outlets that they personally disagree with - that is, if they aren't already? They are no better than the corrupt dictatorships they claim to be protecting us from.
  - hulitu 2y ago
    > Misinformation from one country is allowed, misinformation from another country isn't. How do we know for sure that the news outlets from Western countries are actually telling the truth about what's going on, and aren't just making things up or lying by omission? You never know for sure. But now, they are trying to "help you". /s
- hulitu 2y ago
  > You should read up a bit more on this, rather than blaming META. Cambridge analytica ? /s

troyvit 2y ago

I think there's a difference between blaming Meta for blocking what it considers blatant misinformation and the effect that these large entities have on speech overall. It's worth exploring in the same way that Brazil's banning of X is, as well as X's labeling of NPR as "U.S. state-affiliated media". Some of these moves show what happens when a private organization is treated like a core service or utility (NPR leaving X doesn't seem to have had much of an effect on anybody). Nobody will grumble if your local Mastodon instance blocks RT, because nobody treats Mastodon as a necessary piece of infrastructure. Russia's response of "Such selective actions against Russian media are unacceptable. ... This complicates prospects for normalising our relations with Meta." is hilarious because they're just gonna have to accept it because (drum-roll) Meta _is_ a private organization and isn't beholden to any b.s. from anybody as far as what audience they want to serve. I also learned via the article that Russia has banned Instagram and Facebook since 2022. I'm a little surprised they didn't think there would be parity there. It's about the amount of influence over global communication that one entity has, and what that entity should look like.