Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Now Deletes Posts That Financially Endanger, Trick People (techcrunch.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: It's not just inciting violence, threats and hate speech that will get Facebook to remove posts by you or your least favorite troll. Endangering someone financially, not just physically, or tricking them to earn a profit are now also strictly prohibited. Facebook today spelled out its policy with more clarity in hopes of establishing a transparent set of rules it can point to when it enforces its policy in the future. "We do not, for example, allow content that could physically or financially endanger people, that intimidates people through hateful language, or that aims to profit by tricking people using Facebook," its VP of policy Richard Allen published today. Web searches show this is the first time Facebook has used that language regarding financial attacks.
It's their platform, and you are not directly paying to access it. They are free to censor or filter content as they wish, and you are free to walk away from it at any time, just like any other online platform that has existed since usenet.
Why do people still treat it like they are entitled to do as they wish with zero consequence? Would you walk into a police station with an NWA "Fuck the police" shit on and expect to be left alone? Of course you wouldn't. If you choose to pull bullshit in someone else's house, expect to be called out. If you do not want to be called out, keep walking.
[Sorry, this signature is unavailable in your country/region]
I think it is worth considering the other side of the coin here, though.
The 'net isn't what it was back in the days when we read usenet with tin. It has become massively centralized, and controlled by a very small number of corporations. To a great many people, the 'net IS Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Google.
As a result, for all intents and purposes, they are the public square. It may be a privately owned public square, but it is the public square. It's not like protesting with a sign in a private mall; there literally is no other place on the Internet where one can have a reasonable expectation of being heard than the "primary set" of platforms.
So, while yes, these are privately owned platforms, they have also been allowed an unprecedented amount of power over information, thought, and speech. I think that we need to be very careful about giving them carte blanche to silence voices and thoughts that those who control these entities do not agree with.
Check your premises.