Facebook goes full tilt Orwellian... Bans "dangerous" commentators, including Farrakhan.

IMO, they should not have been banned unless they broke the rules that Facebook enforces for all users. If they abused the platform and spead racism, incited violence or organized other unsavory ventures, then ban them. Otherwise, Facebook looks a little "thugish", as in "I know who you are and you are not welcome here".

Who and what will Facebook ban next? I have friends that follow vintage aircraft from WW2, that includes the P-51 and the German ME-109. The ME-109 frequently has the German markings and in some cases, the swastika. Are they going to ban these sites as well?

Facebook hasn't done a good job over the last few years in regards to their image. This didn't really help.

 

Then why are you here? Seriously. Why are you here, then??

Go get a Facebook or a twitter account and then come back and you can comment with some actual knowledge on the topic. As of right now, you are clogging up an interesting thread with your nonsense. I notice how you just had to bring Trump into it... Really? Not every single topic needs you spouting off about Trump.

At least have the decency to the OP to be able to address the topic he set forth. Otherwise, it's just plain trolling.

 

I'm shocked the NRA is still welcome on FB. Their official page has 4 million followers. Maybe too much ad revenue to send to the principal's office.

 

I would guess all that were banned have done something in violation of Facebook policy, not once, but many times and finally Facebook said enough is enough

no one shoudl be forcing facebook to host hate speech....

maybe they can create a competing site called hateBook or something

 

How would you know? You don't do Facebook. You just got done telling everyone in this thread.

If you don't do Facebook then you have no idea what goes on there, do you?

 

It should be an individual responsibility but the problem now tends to be that people tend to belive and except anything they hear or read if it reinforces their already held beliefs. I know it sounds like elitism to talk about the obvious inability of large porportions of the population to separate fact from fiction but I doubt any rational observer would argue the truth of that observation.

We have arrived at a point in society where even the White House can talk about alternative facts. Something is wrong with America and needs to be fixed before it just degenerates hopelessly into irreconcilable factions and the minimum would seem to be at least some method of eliminating lies masquerading as fact.

 

I think you hit the nail right on the head. Revenue. If it's one thing you can count on Facebook for, it's ad revenue. They love the money and the NRA is a good income stream.

maybe, but the bans seem to come out of the blue, it's not like they just signed up and then get kicked off. They have had accounts for a while.

maybe they were doing something in chat? can Facebook read all the chats? I would imagine they can.

I don't do anything politically in Facebook... In fact I purposely avoid it, but I have friends that get sent to "facebook jail" where they get their accounts locked out for rule violations. So, did all 3 of those accounts break the rules all at the same time and then get banned?

Seems odd.

 

Facebooks primary goal has always been to harvest data and sell it. Don't swallow the facebook kool aid

 

So? Why should this be any concern of yours?

Oh I'm sure you're right. But I ask again, "so?"

So call them on it. Sounds like you just did.

And Facebook censoring the expression of people its management team doesn't like is the solution?

 

Never underestimate the power of the almighty dollar to separate even truest of true believers from his deeply-held true beliefs.

 

So if you don't use VA hospitals you have no idea what goes on there. And if you don't live in Iraq you have no idea what goes on there. And if you don't live in cities you have mo idea what goes on there. Got the picture yet?

 

yes, they were given many chances, they did not correct their behavior and now they are banned

 

I've never really listened to either.

One of biggest problems I have with social media is that it spreads a lot of false information. In the early days of Wikipedia, I contributed quite a few articles, on technical and engineering subjects. Yet I discovered that quite a bit in Wikipedia is less than truthful. I've come to the attitude that nothing on the internet can be trusted 100%.

In such an environment, it is easy for those with nefarious intent, to succeed.

 

Is that true, or are you guessing?

 

Of course it is of concern to me since I am an American citizen concerned about the increasing polarization of Americans and diminishment of faith in government and institutions in America.

To me it is increasingly clear that we are acting and ibcreasingly thinking like a third workd country and if you don't find that troubling I would suggest you ask yourself why.

 

So I ask again... why silence the loudmouths? When you can just ignore...

 

I don't know why this isn't better understood. Users give their data for free, Facebook sells it for big bucks.

 

Do not they have their own web sites? I'm sure they do.

If I was having a party and such people showed up, I would throw them out. There used to be this thing called human decency. I'd rather not be around horrible people. They need to be called out.

 

And for the second time, I ask you... how does making Facebook responsible for fact-checking every single one of the billions of posts per minute submitted from almost every country on the planet meet this end? How is that even practical? It would take six months to get one post approved. And what about posts from outside the USA? Your mythical fact-checking bureau has no jurisdiction there. Maybe we need to isolate the internet altogether from outside countries like they do in China. And then once the facts are checked, who checks the fact checkers? And who checks the checkers of the checkers? And what is a fact? Is it a fact that the sky is blue? Actually it is not. The sky is colorless. But we all agree it is blue. The logical conclusion to your proposal is just to ban everyone from leaving their house. It's too dangerous to let them just wander free out there in the world, all on their own without the government nanny to guide them and steer them away from trouble or challenging ideas.

OR!

We can reestablish personal responsibility as a virtue and tell the school kids that some people have different ideas than they do and that it's OK to confront those ideas, discuss, debate, and draw their own conclusions. And sometimes they will learn that their conclusions are wrong. And play doh is not the answer. Just say yes to intellectual inquiry. Just say no to play doh.

 

Ducking the question. Is it just me or is there a pattern emerging here?

Straw man fallacy. Your house party =/= Facebook. I seriously hope I don't have to explain why.

 

common sense, hate sites get reported all the time, just now face book is responding to those complaints

the haters just need a place to call home, sounds like a business opportunity

 

Gee ever heard of computers.

And just for laughs why not prove the sky is colorless. Or are you confusing sky with the atmosphere?

 

My primary complaint is that the public discourse had become, ignorant, dishonest, and crude. I gave up Facebook rather quickly because of the dishonesty, ignorance, and crudeness.

It Zuckerberg and company wants to clean up Facebook, I'm all for it.

 

Seems odd all 3 would get banned at the same time, unless they did it for PR reasons.

 

OK, so there's one vote against free speech. Good to know where you stand.