Facebook recently ignited a firestorm when it announced that it is banning conservative, controversial and non-mainstream personalities such as Milo Yiannopoulos, Alex Jones and Laura Loomer.
Facebook says this controversial move was done in part to address critics who claim Facebook was doing a poor job of policing its platform for hateful and inciteful views.
On the other side, free speech advocates ask whether Facebook is bending to political pressure to avoid government threat of regulation. They ask whether this invites the government to be involved in a calculation it should have no role in.
Other critics point to objectionable and hateful content on the left that is tolerated, unfettered, on Facebook and other social media platforms.
You can read more about this story in Jeremy Barr’s “Facebook Permanently Bans Prominent Far-Right Figures” below:
“We’ve always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology,” the social network said of the ban on Alex Jones, Lara Loomer and others.
After months of blowback about inadequately patrolling hate speech on the platforms it owns, Facebook announced plans on Thursday to permanently ban far-right personalities, including Alex Jones, Laura Loomer, Milo Yiannopoulos and Paul Joseph Watson, as well as Jones’ Infowars publication.
Facebook and Instagram are also taking action against Louis Farrakhan and Paul Nehlen, who have been accused of anti-Semitism.
“We’ve always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology,” the social network said in a statement. “The process for evaluating potential violators is extensive and it is what led us to our decision to remove these accounts today.”
(Continued)
Read the rest of the article here: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/facebook-permanently-bans-prominent-alt-right-figures-1206926
Fight government overreach and double-standard justice by supporting the Attkisson Fourth Amendment Litigation Fund for Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI for the government computer intrusions. Click here.
Facebook is more like Spybook + Fascistbook. Only one opinion allowed and discrimination is ok as long as it’s against a conservative, Christian or anyone who dares to think for themselves. It’s so creepy that I and many of my friends and family have closed accounts. They’re a monopoly and must be broken apart, Regulations will just ensure no one will ever be able to compete against them. In my lifetime I’ve never seen one person have so much influence on politics, opinion and the psyche of the world. Very dangerous and unhealthy.
The Hill banned me from commenting on its stories, but it lets all the Trump haters spew their bile.
It is what it is and no doubt will bend and participate in lobbying as it becomes more mature. One can decide to be a member of Facebook or not. I believe the word regulation could be substituted by accountability.
Why is this article in the format of a question? The only question that is seemingly to simple for anyone to ask Zuckerberg is why, if in his testimony before Congress, he was unable to define “hate speech”, how is he monitoring his platform for “hate speech”. Does he have a definition now that he didn’t have when he testified ? And if he does……….will someone in the media please ask him what it is.