6 ms·

Facebook is a corporation and can 'censor' whoever they like. They are not 'the US'. Part of the reason why they moderate content is the same reason that a bar

by davidw 2y ago

Facebook is a corporation and can 'censor' whoever they like. They are not 'the US'. Part of the reason why they moderate content is the same reason that a bar owner turfs out people who are rowdy and threatening the other patrons: because the normies will leave and you're left with a bunch of nasty, loud people. That is, after all, why this site we're on right now is so heavily moderated: it makes for a better user experience.

philwelch 2y ago
It turns out that “normies” were people who have the kinds of normal, mainstream beliefs that Facebook has spent the past four years censoring.
- davidw 2y ago
  The only thing that "turns out" is they wish to curry favor with the incoming administration. FB hasn't been censoring much of anything as far as I can tell; there are all kinds of vile, nasty comments all over it. Just unfriendly, unkind stuff, not even political things. It's probably one reason it's kind of struggling as a platform - that kind of thing isn't much fun.
  - philistine 2y ago
    That's the silver lining through all of that: when right-wing ideologues start imposing their own groupthink model on social media, it stops being fun and people start to leave. Just look at Twitter. It's just not as fun anymore on there.
  - jjk7 2y ago
    The parent's point, is that the incoming administration won the popular vote... they are the 'normies' now.
    - davidw 2y ago
      Most voters don't care much about any of the details of this. They're not terribly unhappy with FB because they're using to keep track of people from high school back in the 90ies, or their families, or local recreation groups or something. Or they're not using it at all because it's for old people like me. This is all just loud, performative subjugation to the incoming administration, that does take things like attacking trans people and immigrants as good stuff.
      - BikiniPrince 2y ago
        I would actually offer they Facebook is changing because their base has grown tired of their antics. My normy friends and family have complained of censorship increasingly over the last year. When I asked why we still use the platform one friend replied: “birthday reminders.” Then I thought that actually does summarize what I use the platform for. Not a great prospect for a company.
        davidw 2y ago
        What sorts of conversations are you attempting to engage in that it is 'censoring' you? It seems pretty rare to me - even in heated exchanges.
        intended 2y ago
        There is a campaign to capitalize on the idea that right wing people are censored. And therefore all Americans are censored. This fight has been fought before, at the dawn of moderation. It’s been fought here on HN. Back when people used to hold libertarian beliefs openly. “The best ideas rise to the top”. No, they frikking dont. The most viral ideas, the most adaptive ideas - those are the ones that survive. Everyone learned that moderation is needed, that hard moderation is the only way to prevent spaces from attracting emotional arguments, harassment, stalking, and hate speech. Maybe this time its different. Moderation is both thankless, soul crushing, and traumatic. Mods r/neworleans effectively became first responders on Jan 1st. I know mods see everything from dead baby pictures, burning bodies, accidental deaths, to worse. IF this works, and reduces the need for mods, great! My suspicion is that it’s going to radicalize more people, faster. Its going to support the creation of more demagogues, and further reduce our ability to communicate with each other.
    - ethbr1 2y ago
      49.8% to 48.3% of the popular vote. That's a pretty thin advantage, and still barely not an outright majority.
      - mcherm 2y ago
        Nearly all the levers of control of the US government to almost no control over the US government: that's a massive advantage. I can't help believing this, not the popular vote, is the motivation.
        ethbr1 2y ago
        Exactly. Particularly the power of the incoming President to create bad PR (with 50% of the country) and the House to haul people into public testimony and yell at them. Not to mention the federal money spigot. Big companies aren't stupid and are largely amoral.
  - usrusr 2y ago
    But is it currying favor? Could just as well be "kiss the ring or you'll see your life's work AT&Ted into oblivion" Perhaps both: might have started as a pragmatic offer to bury the hatchet, then quickly turned into the never ending firehose of demands of an extortionist who just realized that he still all the cards after the extortee has given in.
zblevins 2y ago
I see what you’re saying, but I also think the user demographics of Hacker News reduce the likelihood of moderation to begin with.
- sneak 2y ago
  I don’t know if that’s true. SV culture has always been a very big tension between monied military-industrial types and (eventually also monied) antiwar hippies. It’s well-documented in SV’s military history, as well as recently, where Apple wasn’t involved in FAA702 illegal spying on americans (PRISM) until after the famously anti-establishment Jobs died. The SV culture seems to have shifted a bit rightward (as has the whole country, tbh) but the tension is still there, and the social conflict remains (although I think there are other factors, not the least of which is the skill and grace of @dang, that keep people on the better side of their behaviors here).
  - zblevins 2y ago
    I agree with what you're saying about SV, especially the military-industrial types. I'm not entirely sure what the makeup of HN demographics is, and would like to know. I have a suspicion that it's not just folks in SV. I also should have clarified more. In my opinion, the discourse here is more civil than on other platforms. I would suggest that has something to do with a combination of education and niche interests that attract a different user base. So maybe not in terms of factual correctness, but certainly in terms of the ability to have a civil conversation.
    - sanderjd 2y ago
      I think you are like a fish who isn't aware of the water it's swimming in. HN doesn't need much moderation, because the discourse is so civil here [narrator voice: because of the good moderation].
      - ethbr1 2y ago
        At scale, the long term community civility balance point is likely dominated by the average user's willingness to change their behavior as a result of peer feedback. The HN userbase, feedback tools, karma-level-locked tools, and new users' personalities seem to create decent outcomes. Which is to say, if someone acts like an asshat, folks let them know (either through downvotes, flags, or replies), and they modify their behavior to be closer to the community norm. That said, I'm aware I don't see a lot of the most egregious stuff the Good Ship Dang torpedoes. Or what I expect are non-zero repeat trolls. And honestly, the fact is that outside of very nerdy street cred, there's little incentive to actively manage discourse for commercial purposes on HN.* * Outside of, you know, cloudflare tailscale rust (any other crawler alarms I can trip)
llm_trw 2y ago
Facebook has said it was pressured by the Biden administration to censor topic like covid. This is as clear cut first amendment case as you will ever find.
- immibis 2y ago
  And we all know that the first amendment can never be immoral, not even when a tidal wave of deliberate propaganda is causing millions of people to die.
  - llm_trw 2y ago
    Yes, the lies the administration told about masks are one of the worst things done this century. There should be a reckoning for officials who lie to us for our own good.
- RansomStark 2y ago
  Your being down voted is amazingly ironic for a topic on the politicization of fact checking. There are hundreds of comments here talking about how objective facts exists and the correctness of fact-checking. You reiterate the statement of the Facebook CEO and what that statement entails and you are moderated. But facts are facts right? Zuckerberg did say Facebook was pressured by the Biden administration to censor covid misinformation, and the Hunter Biden laptop story [0], [1], [2] (multiple left-wing references for good measure). If Zuckerberg is telling the truth, that is a clear cut first amendment violation. A private company can censor whatever it wants (mostly) but not at the behest of the government, there's law against that. [0] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/zuckerberg-says-the-white-house-pressured-facebook-to-censor-some-covid-19-content-during-the-pandemic https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/zuckerberg-says-the-wh... [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czxlpjlgdzjo https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czxlpjlgdzjo [2] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/aug/27/mark-zuckerberg-says-white-house-pressured-facebook-to-censor-covid-19-content https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/aug/27/m...
- NCFZ 2y ago
  If it's so clear cut then why did SCOTUS throw that case out?

by davidw 2y ago

philwelch 2y ago

It turns out that “normies” were people who have the kinds of normal, mainstream beliefs that Facebook has spent the past four years censoring.

davidw 2y ago
The only thing that "turns out" is they wish to curry favor with the incoming administration. FB hasn't been censoring much of anything as far as I can tell; there are all kinds of vile, nasty comments all over it. Just unfriendly, unkind stuff, not even political things. It's probably one reason it's kind of struggling as a platform - that kind of thing isn't much fun.
- philistine 2y ago
  That's the silver lining through all of that: when right-wing ideologues start imposing their own groupthink model on social media, it stops being fun and people start to leave. Just look at Twitter. It's just not as fun anymore on there.
- jjk7 2y ago
  The parent's point, is that the incoming administration won the popular vote... they are the 'normies' now.
  - davidw 2y ago
    Most voters don't care much about any of the details of this. They're not terribly unhappy with FB because they're using to keep track of people from high school back in the 90ies, or their families, or local recreation groups or something. Or they're not using it at all because it's for old people like me. This is all just loud, performative subjugation to the incoming administration, that does take things like attacking trans people and immigrants as good stuff.
    - BikiniPrince 2y ago
      I would actually offer they Facebook is changing because their base has grown tired of their antics. My normy friends and family have complained of censorship increasingly over the last year. When I asked why we still use the platform one friend replied: “birthday reminders.” Then I thought that actually does summarize what I use the platform for. Not a great prospect for a company.
      - davidw 2y ago
        What sorts of conversations are you attempting to engage in that it is 'censoring' you? It seems pretty rare to me - even in heated exchanges.
        intended 2y ago
        There is a campaign to capitalize on the idea that right wing people are censored. And therefore all Americans are censored. This fight has been fought before, at the dawn of moderation. It’s been fought here on HN. Back when people used to hold libertarian beliefs openly. “The best ideas rise to the top”. No, they frikking dont. The most viral ideas, the most adaptive ideas - those are the ones that survive. Everyone learned that moderation is needed, that hard moderation is the only way to prevent spaces from attracting emotional arguments, harassment, stalking, and hate speech. Maybe this time its different. Moderation is both thankless, soul crushing, and traumatic. Mods r/neworleans effectively became first responders on Jan 1st. I know mods see everything from dead baby pictures, burning bodies, accidental deaths, to worse. IF this works, and reduces the need for mods, great! My suspicion is that it’s going to radicalize more people, faster. Its going to support the creation of more demagogues, and further reduce our ability to communicate with each other.
  - ethbr1 2y ago
    49.8% to 48.3% of the popular vote. That's a pretty thin advantage, and still barely not an outright majority.
    - mcherm 2y ago
      Nearly all the levers of control of the US government to almost no control over the US government: that's a massive advantage. I can't help believing this, not the popular vote, is the motivation.
      - ethbr1 2y ago
        Exactly. Particularly the power of the incoming President to create bad PR (with 50% of the country) and the House to haul people into public testimony and yell at them. Not to mention the federal money spigot. Big companies aren't stupid and are largely amoral.
- usrusr 2y ago
  But is it currying favor? Could just as well be "kiss the ring or you'll see your life's work AT&Ted into oblivion" Perhaps both: might have started as a pragmatic offer to bury the hatchet, then quickly turned into the never ending firehose of demands of an extortionist who just realized that he still all the cards after the extortee has given in.

zblevins 2y ago

I see what you’re saying, but I also think the user demographics of Hacker News reduce the likelihood of moderation to begin with.

sneak 2y ago
I don’t know if that’s true. SV culture has always been a very big tension between monied military-industrial types and (eventually also monied) antiwar hippies. It’s well-documented in SV’s military history, as well as recently, where Apple wasn’t involved in FAA702 illegal spying on americans (PRISM) until after the famously anti-establishment Jobs died. The SV culture seems to have shifted a bit rightward (as has the whole country, tbh) but the tension is still there, and the social conflict remains (although I think there are other factors, not the least of which is the skill and grace of @dang, that keep people on the better side of their behaviors here).
- zblevins 2y ago
  I agree with what you're saying about SV, especially the military-industrial types. I'm not entirely sure what the makeup of HN demographics is, and would like to know. I have a suspicion that it's not just folks in SV. I also should have clarified more. In my opinion, the discourse here is more civil than on other platforms. I would suggest that has something to do with a combination of education and niche interests that attract a different user base. So maybe not in terms of factual correctness, but certainly in terms of the ability to have a civil conversation.
  - sanderjd 2y ago
    I think you are like a fish who isn't aware of the water it's swimming in. HN doesn't need much moderation, because the discourse is so civil here [narrator voice: because of the good moderation].
    - ethbr1 2y ago
      At scale, the long term community civility balance point is likely dominated by the average user's willingness to change their behavior as a result of peer feedback. The HN userbase, feedback tools, karma-level-locked tools, and new users' personalities seem to create decent outcomes. Which is to say, if someone acts like an asshat, folks let them know (either through downvotes, flags, or replies), and they modify their behavior to be closer to the community norm. That said, I'm aware I don't see a lot of the most egregious stuff the Good Ship Dang torpedoes. Or what I expect are non-zero repeat trolls. And honestly, the fact is that outside of very nerdy street cred, there's little incentive to actively manage discourse for commercial purposes on HN.* * Outside of, you know, cloudflare tailscale rust (any other crawler alarms I can trip)

llm_trw 2y ago

Facebook has said it was pressured by the Biden administration to censor topic like covid. This is as clear cut first amendment case as you will ever find.

immibis 2y ago
And we all know that the first amendment can never be immoral, not even when a tidal wave of deliberate propaganda is causing millions of people to die.
- llm_trw 2y ago
  Yes, the lies the administration told about masks are one of the worst things done this century. There should be a reckoning for officials who lie to us for our own good.
RansomStark 2y ago
Your being down voted is amazingly ironic for a topic on the politicization of fact checking. There are hundreds of comments here talking about how objective facts exists and the correctness of fact-checking. You reiterate the statement of the Facebook CEO and what that statement entails and you are moderated. But facts are facts right? Zuckerberg did say Facebook was pressured by the Biden administration to censor covid misinformation, and the Hunter Biden laptop story [0], [1], [2] (multiple left-wing references for good measure). If Zuckerberg is telling the truth, that is a clear cut first amendment violation. A private company can censor whatever it wants (mostly) but not at the behest of the government, there's law against that. [0] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/zuckerberg-says-the-white-house-pressured-facebook-to-censor-some-covid-19-content-during-the-pandemic https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/zuckerberg-says-the-wh... [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czxlpjlgdzjo https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czxlpjlgdzjo [2] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/aug/27/mark-zuckerberg-says-white-house-pressured-facebook-to-censor-covid-19-content https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/aug/27/m...
NCFZ 2y ago
If it's so clear cut then why did SCOTUS throw that case out?