Part of the problem with Facebook is that people are understandably upset about the spread of harmful misinformation, and are demanding that Facebook do something about it. This raises the question of how harmful misinformation should be handled.
On 12/28/2022 at 2:37 PM, dream_weaver said:
Free speech does not mean that a microphone (or internet format, etc., …) be provided. Endangering those around you by yelling “Fire” in a crowded theater has, thus far, provided a concrete example used as a counter-example.
… Unless, of course, there actually IS a fire in the crowded theatre. 
A lot of these issues have an implicit element of whether the speech is truthful or fraudulent.
On 12/28/2022 at 5:18 PM, Eiuol said:
There is no smoking gun of an email saying “yes daddy Biden, your wish is my command”. But at least if that were the case, or such evidence did appear, the companies and the government should get in big trouble. It’s not a question of content moderation by private companies.
Yes, I agree that the content moderation of private companies (when uncoerced and fully separate from the government) is a private issue. But I’d just like to make a little note that you also agree that everyone involved should get in big trouble if the government is puppeteering such actions from behind the scenes.
On 12/28/2022 at 6:18 PM, tadmjones said:
Lol Biden is in charge.
The companies are censoring individuals named by the government. They are not hunting neo Nazis , they’re in Kherson.
A lot of the FBI collusion exposed in the Twitter Files long predates Biden; I think it goes as far back as 2017. So it’s possible that Trump could’ve been pulling those levers to deplatform leftists - I personally doubt it but by all available evidence it is possible. The guys reporting on the Twitter Files claimed that both sides made censorship requests during the 2020 campaign.
On 12/30/2022 at 1:22 PM, Doug Morris said:
This raises the question of how harmful misinformation should be handled.
Thought crime. Let’s get the terminology straight. “Misinformation” means thought crime and it should be handled by open opposition and debate; not by the government.
2 hours ago, Harrison Danneskjold said:
… Unless, of course, there actually IS a fire in the crowded theatre.
Do I want Facebook, Twitter, etc., creating algorithms to filter what can be posted or redacted to my feed? Ultimately I want to be the one determining if said speech is truthful or not, not delegating it to a third party saying “trust us to filter it for you.”
1 Like