Zuckerberg in Holocaust denial row

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44883743

by parvenu74 • 8 years ago

25 34 8 years ago

bbc.co.uk

Ethics vs free speech. A company whose bottom line relies on ad dollars should probably lean towards ethics.

Najda• 8 years ago

How do you draw the line of what crosses the boundary too far and needs to be taken down though? Ethics are not absolute and change from country to country while Facebook is a global platform.

lolsal7• 8 years ago

I don't run a huge company or have any influence whatsoever, so I am probably being very naive - but I believe the Holocaust happened and if I were in his position I would not remove Denier rhetoric either.

staticautomatic• 8 years ago

Why not?

lolsal7• 8 years ago

I believe in free speech whether or not I believe with what is being spoken.

gsich• 8 years ago

It's tedious to remove.

jimnotgym• 8 years ago

Zuckerberg demonstrates an alarming tendency to appear inhuman sometimes.

theseatoms• 8 years ago

Publisher vs Platform. They're still trying to have it both ways.

brink• 8 years ago

While I do take a strong stance against flat-earthers, Holocaust deniers, etc.. I can sympathize with Zuckerberg here a little bit, because just banning Holocaust deniers is on a big slippery slope, that could lead to larger issues like "Do we ban religious speak against homosexuality due to instruction from an invisible man in the sky?" since we only deal in materialistic fact here and all controversial opinions are unwelcome. Where do we draw the line?

AdmiralAsshat• 8 years ago

"I'm Jewish and there's a set of people who deny that the Holocaust happened," he told reporter Kara Swisher.

"BARBARA. Sorry, I'm sure. By the way, papa, what is your religion--in case I have to introduce you again?

UNDERSHAFT. My religion? Well, my dear, I am a Millionaire. That is my religion."

- Major Barbara [0]

[0]http://www.fullbooks.com/MAJOR-BARBARA1.html

JohnBerea2• 8 years ago

Editor of anti-fascist magazine Searchlight Gerry Gable told the BBC: "Zuckerberg could kill much of this dangerous material getting worldwide distribution - but he is a like a spoilt teenager."

It's a strange world when the "antifascists" want control of speech.

JoeAltmaier2• 8 years ago

Used to be, hate speech got disseminated slowly because of the resistance of the crowd to repeating it. But give one guy a machine-gun message-spreading website, that's a whole new world.

Free-to-speak is one thing; free to distribute hate speech by electronic means to billions of people in seconds is another.

Its a game these days, to pretend one thing is the same as another even though they are massively different.

21• 8 years ago

If someone says "I hate ICE, I hate police", should they be censored too, and their message not distributed?

candiodari• 8 years ago

Translation: you can speak freely, as long as you aren't heard.

Used to be conspiracy theory, now actual basis for action of an actual political force.

Sad times.

onyva3• 8 years ago

Holocaust denial is illegal and punishable by law in many countries. Spreading lies and disinformation is not free speech. Outcome is dangerous and already led to disastrous events in the USA, India, Myanmar etc.

JohnBerea2• 8 years ago

I've debated several holocaust deniers and I've never met one who was deliberately lying. It's a dangerous world when we make it "illegal and punishable" to be wrong.

tribune• 8 years ago

To be clear, he said that the words of Holocaust deniers are allowed on Facebook. I guess what you think shouldn't be allowed on Facebook depends on what your definition of free speech is (if you accept that Facebook should allow free speech).

He also added: "I find it deeply offensive. But at the end of the day, I don't believe that our platform should take that down because I think there are things that different people get wrong. I don't think that they're intentionally getting it wrong.

That strikes me as naïve. Some, no doubt, are intentionally getting it wrong. Others have their heads so deep in the conspiracy sand that no polite discourse on Facebook is going to resolve it. Either way, this doesn't seem like a huge deal. Zuck says Facebook allows freedom of speech, even in muddy waters.

headcanon• 8 years ago

I think the line he is trying to draw is this:

Scenario 1: I am a facebook user that wants to say something that people find offensive. I may write or share an article I found online to "support" my views. This is allowed under the idea of Free Speech.

Scenario 2: I am some entity that wants to generate controversy and polarization by gaming recommendation algorithms, and thus flood the space of discourse with offensive material. I don't care about the material itself less so than the vitriol and outrage. AKA "Fake News". This is what they want to ban.

What trolls have done is essentially "hacked" the idea of Free Speech. The original idea behind Free speech was that people would at the very least earnestly believe what they were saying, or at the very least were engaging in satire. Trolling is satire on a whole new level, and it does seem truly difficult to separate the two without being too draconian.

Zuckerberg in Holocaust denial row

Related Stories