Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Says it Will Now Block White-Nationalist, White-Separatist Posts (washingtonpost.com)
Facebook will begin banning posts, photos and other content that reference white nationalism and white separatism, revising its rules in response to criticism that a loophole had allowed racism to thrive on its platform. From a report: Previously, Facebook only had prohibited users from sharing messages that glorified white supremacy -- a rhetorical discrepancy, in the eyes of civil rights advocates, who argued that white nationalism, supremacy and separatism are indistinguishable and that the policy undermined the tech giant's stepped-up efforts to combat hate speech online. Facebook now agrees with that analysis, [Editor's note: the link may be paywalled; alternative source] according to people who've been briefed on the decision. The new policy also applies to Instagram. The rise and spread of white nationalism on Facebook were thrown into sharp relief in the wake of the deadly neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017, when self-avowed white nationalists used the social networking site as an organizing tool.
It's only Facebook. If their service censors stuff you want to read just use a different one. Twitter, Gab and 4/8chan all allow this kind of content. Twitter does as long as you don't call for violence or harass people, the others don't even care about that.
What is it about Facebook that makes it so special?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
No. From TFA:
"It also doesn’t change the company’s existing policies on separatist and nationalist movements more generally; content relating to Black separatist movements and the Basque separatist movement, for example, will still be allowed."
It seems to me that Facebook does not follow a principle here. They are not banning race based separatism/nationalism as such but are targeting whites only. If they were targeting any other group than whites there would be a public outcry about racist Facebook policies. And that outcry would have been well justified. Facebook policies are obviously openly racist.
you mean the one where
No, I'm pretty sure he means the one where a white nationalist named James Fields drove his car thru a crowd and killed a woman---a woman who had never even seen or spoken to him.
If I recall, he got a life sentence for that.
then some fat cunt had a heart attack?
Wow, the alt-right will say just about anything... except the truth, won't they.
None of what is being described is censorship.
Just because the censorship is being performed by a private entity does not make it not-censorship.
There's a good argument to be made that companies like Twitter/FB/YT are public spaces and should be prohibited from censoring anything that is not illegal in the US.
During "Occupy Wallstreet" Zuccotti Park was prohibited from kicking the protesters out even though Zuccotti Park is privately owned because it was considered a public space. Seeing as a small handful of Silicon Valley megacorps control upwards of 90% of human online communications, there's an even stronger case for declaring them public spaces and therefor prohibited from infringing on 1st Amendment rights.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.