The bottom line on censorship

https://www.jta.org/2020/09/03/opinion/former-aclu-president-says-censor...

Bummer of a last line, though; maybe a sufficient propagation would ameliorate it?

If you're reading this, do what I did and try sending it to as many people as is reasonable for you to do; it might just turn the tide.

Share
up
7 users have voted.

Comments

thanatokephaloides's picture

From its public reports, each month, Facebook claims it is taking down more alleged hate speech messages than all governments added up together all around the world throughout history. They’re taking down hundreds and hundreds of thousands of posts, a huge percentage of which are subject to appeal.

So on one hand, they have this enormous power, but on the other hand, they’re not subject to any of the constitutional constraints that restrain government power. Not only are they not subject to the First Amendment itself, but they’re not subject to any kind of due process. They don’t have to give us notice of what their roles are. They don’t have to give us an opportunity to argue against being removed from the platform or having a particular message removed.

They’re not accountable, ultimately, to We the People the way the government is. So it’s a terrible combination of power without democratic restraints.

source

And no "reforms" will fix that problem; it would cut too far into profits, snd frankly, I think Mark Zuckerberg enjoys having that power to lord it over all the rest of us.

Ceterem censeo: Facebook delendum est. (And further, I opine: Facebook must be destroyed.)

Bad

up
12 users have voted.

"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar

"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides

enhydra lutris's picture

be well and have a good one

up
3 users have voted.

That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

TheOtherMaven's picture

Every two-bit message board claims the right to remove messages and ban people who "violate community standards" - an elastic term which basically means "Don't say anything that might upset the Owners".

At least one of them takes it a lot farther than that. If you say anything that the moderators don't like, they will FRAME you and arbitrarily ban you on the specious excuse of "having multiple accounts" - when you DON'T. And from this decision there is no appeal. (Ironically, that isn't even a political board - it's a place to discuss f'n comic books. But they still will not allow any dissent.)

up
1 user has voted.

There is no justice. There can be no peace.

TheOtherMaven's picture

@TheOtherMaven

that no one has chosen to comment on this. It may seem like a minor and unimportant instance of injustice to you, but it wasn't to me.

up
1 user has voted.

There is no justice. There can be no peace.

travelerxxx's picture

@TheOtherMaven

I don't know what you do in a situation as you described above. In a way, it's the old "freedom of the press only for those with the press" type thing. Short of not dealing with jerks (at least if you know ahead of time they're jerks), you're at their mercy.

In my time, I've written plenty of letters-to-the-editor. Evidently, most hit the circular file. Of those published, only a few were not either edited, truncated, or used in a way that made an opposite point. What could I do about it? Not jack.

I've seen no good solution, whether it's corrupt dealings in regard to a web site, a newspaper that is concerned only with selling real estate and Buick advertising, or even petitioning our government. The only thing I can think of that can effect a change would be a mass of people rising up against whatever eninty is causing the problem. In most cases, that's not so likely ...not that it occasionally doesn't happen.

up
0 users have voted.