Fascist Facebook blocks/suspends Michael Savage (1 Viewer)

[SaintsInDome2006]

And who determines which websites / groups advocate violence?  The liberally biased SPLC?  I despise Stormfront, but is there anything overt on their website calling for violence?  And if it's just based on results (we know that Stormfront adherents have committed murder) then would you consider Black Lives Matter in the same regard?

I'm not in favor of the 'truth commission' or whatever it's called that twitter uses.

As others have mentioned it's a private company, so the owners should do it.

We're all good with AQ & IS, yes? And KKK I would think.

Stormfront is arguably an online community not a group, so maybe they don't apply after all, I don't know if the use FB or tweet actually.

I see you're trying to make a moral equivalence there but the fact I disagree with that really doesn't matter. They are an entity but imo no they don't advocate murder, war or social violence as an entity. I don't want to debate that btw. I'm trying to defend the far right's ability to speak, I don't know if making me think too much about that is helping.

 

[squistion]

I'm not in favor of the 'truth commission' or whatever it's called that twitter uses.

As others have mentioned it's a private company, so the owners should do it.

We're all good with AQ & IS, yes? And KKK I would think.

Stormfront is arguably an online community not a group, so maybe they don't apply after all, I don't know if the use FB or tweet actually.

I see you're trying to make a moral equivalence there but the fact I disagree with that really doesn't matter. They are an entity but imo no they don't advocate murder, war or social violence as an entity. I don't want to debate that btw. I'm trying to defend the far right's ability to speak, I don't know if making me think too much about that is helping.

The KKK has their own website (which I will not link) and has not had any censorship issues with the government that I am aware of. In fact I am not certain that ISIS website is blocked - looking it up, NY Times article said it should be blocked and the FCC had doubts it could be done:

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/260438-fcc-says-it-cant-shutdown-online-terrorist-activity

FCC says it can't shut down ISIS websites

[...]

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) asked Friday during a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee whether the FCC has the authority to block such websites and social media accounts, following last week's deadly terrorist attacks in Paris. 

"Isn't there something we can do under existing law to shut those Internet sites down?" Barton asked. "And I know they pop up like weeds, but once they do pop up, shut them down and turn the Internet addresses over to the appropriate law enforcement agencies to try and track them down."

"We cannot underestimate the challenge," FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler responded. "I'm not sure our authority extends to [shut down the websites], but I do think there are specific things we can do."

Wheeler similarly told Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) that the commission does not have the authority to target the social media accounts of gang leaders in the United States that are contributing to urban violence. 

"We do not have jurisdiction over Facebook and all the other edge providers. We do not intend to assert jurisdiction over them," Wheeler said. 

But the chairman said he can use the FCC's bully pulpit to press tech CEOs on the issue, such as Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg.

"I will call Mark Zuckerberg this afternoon to raise the issue you've raised and the issue Mr. Barton raised. And I'm sure he is concerned as well and he'll have some thoughts," Wheeler said. 

Many major social media companies have abuse policies that prohibit and remove accounts that are flagged for promoting terrorism or violence

 

[Zow]

Drudge aggregates but he also vettes the stories.  How well he does is up for debate.  I guess we'll find out on this one. The story's been out there for a day and Facebook hasn't repudiated it yet.

I know from firsthand experience that Facebook does a ####ty job applying a consistent, fair standard when it comes to hate speech.  In the days following the murder of the Dallas cops I lodged a complaint with facebook against a black radical site that had a graphic picture of a black man slitting a white cop's throat.  Facebook came back and said it didn't violate their decency standards.  I appealed it and they came back with the same response.  Eventually public pressure mounted and about a week later they changed their mind and made the site take the picture down.

 at reporting somebody on Facebook. 

Need that safe space, eh?

 

[Zow]

Facebook isn't just a run of the mill private company.  A company this big, with so much reach into how people receive their news, better be right down the middle or they'll invite government intervention.

You sound like a democrat here. 

 

[bagger]

It's pretty simple, and it's true about being suspended here or wherever.

dont be a dip #### and you'll be ok.

 

[Uncle CornCob]

Michael Savage Wiener is a terrible human being.

Horrible posts like this led to Savage & Teddy being assaulted a couple of weeks ago. Horrible intolerance 

 

[Uncle CornCob]

The KKK has their own website (which I will not link) and has not had any censorship issues with the government that I am aware of. In fact I am not certain that ISIS website is blocked - looking it up, NY Times article said it should be blocked and the FCC had doubts it could be done:

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/260438-fcc-says-it-cant-shutdown-online-terrorist-activity

FCC says it can't shut down ISIS websites

[...]

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) asked Friday during a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee whether the FCC has the authority to block such websites and social media accounts, following last week's deadly terrorist attacks in Paris. 

"Isn't there something we can do under existing law to shut those Internet sites down?" Barton asked. "And I know they pop up like weeds, but once they do pop up, shut them down and turn the Internet addresses over to the appropriate law enforcement agencies to try and track them down."

"We cannot underestimate the challenge," FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler responded. "I'm not sure our authority extends to [shut down the websites], but I do think there are specific things we can do."

Wheeler similarly told Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) that the commission does not have the authority to target the social media accounts of gang leaders in the United States that are contributing to urban violence. 

"We do not have jurisdiction over Facebook and all the other edge providers. We do not intend to assert jurisdiction over them," Wheeler said. 

But the chairman said he can use the FCC's bully pulpit to press tech CEOs on the issue, such as Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg.

"I will call Mark Zuckerberg this afternoon to raise the issue you've raised and the issue Mr. Barton raised. And I'm sure he is concerned as well and he'll have some thoughts," Wheeler said. 

Many major social media companies have abuse policies that prohibit and remove accounts that are flagged for promoting terrorism or violence

 

[bagger]

No.  I want Facebook to be consistent and non-biased.  I hate government regulation.

How to enforce that? 

Rhymes with meg you lay shone.

 

[da_budman]

Horrible posts like this led to Savage & Teddy being assaulted a couple of weeks ago. Horrible intolerance 

 

[skol asylum]

Horrible posts like this led to Savage & Teddy being assaulted a couple of weeks ago. Horrible intolerance 

https://youtu.be/JmcA9LIIXWw

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

censorship issues with the government

I am not talking about government censorship, much less advocating for it (never).

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/260438-fcc-says-it-cant-shutdown-online-terrorist-activity

FCC says it can't shut down ISIS websites

[...] Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) asked Friday during a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee whether the FCC has the authority to block such websites and social media accounts, following last week's deadly terrorist attacks in Paris. ...

I'm against this, and actually Hillary talked about this in her campaign. I don't think the state should be doing this. I think everyone can imagine the inherent dangers here. The key is for us to keep our freedoms and traditions not let the terrorists drive us into damaging them ourselves.

Private companies, yes, do private things. As to any or all of the arguments in here I don't argue that private companies (like FBGs) don't have the right to manage their own content. I do think when sites become so large and ingrained like FB that they can become quasi-public forums in terms of speech but I would never extend that to the point of allowing regulation of speech or as quasi-utilities.

 

[Higgs]

Interesting article on the rise of anti-Semitism on the web.  Wait - that can't be a Breitbart article.  Unpossible! 

http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2017/03/26/report-social-media-awash-with-anti-semitism-new-post-uploaded-every-83-seconds/

 

[squistion]

Interesting article on the rise of anti-Semitism on the web.  Wait - that can't be a Breitbart article.  Unpossible! 

http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2017/03/26/report-social-media-awash-with-anti-semitism-new-post-uploaded-every-83-seconds/

What does this have to do with Facebook and their supposedly fascist policies?

 

[Dr Oadi]

Community standards.  

When did liberals start having standards?

 

[The Big Guy]

Most joke pages on Facebook have been suspended via reporting at one time or another. So it seems like they care about crude jokes more than they care about violence.

 

[Higgs]

It's nice when reputable sites like InfoWars tell us who and what we should be angry about.

Looks like the story was true.  https://youtu.be/FldUZI9l-hI

 

[squistion]

Looks like the story was true.  https://youtu.be/FldUZI9l-hI

No one had said it wasn't true - Facebook's actions here has been well documented.

Looks like you posted this YouTube clip (which just quotes Infowars) to repeat what you said earlier and try to get some more mileage out this non-story about a private social media company making  an editorial decision.

 

[squistion]

4 hours ago, Higgs said:

Interesting article on the rise of anti-Semitism on the web.  Wait - that can't be a Breitbart article.  Unpossible! 

http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2017/03/26/report-social-media-awash-with-anti-semitism-new-post-uploaded-every-83-seconds/

What does this have to do with Facebook and their supposedly fascist policies?

:crickets:

Not surprising you didn't respond to this as it really has nothing to do with anything discussed in this thread. I am guessing you just wanted to post it somewhere so you could get another Breitbart link in and didn't really care whether if it was relevant or not.