Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6782
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby sardia » Sun Jun 02, 2013 5:36 pm UTC

Right now, most social media companies, google facebook etc etc, run on a standard that mirrors the US version of free speech. The US version differs not because it is better, but because it is more permissive of hate speech and allows statements that would be censored in other countries, Europe included. Now these companies don't just do it because they are employed and based in the US, but because it is commercially profitable and it is in their interests for the free flow of information. Aka, they make tons of money off of information. This is looking to be an open and shut case right? Freedom and justice blah blah blah? What about if several women's rights groups pressure facebook to censor really really offensive jokes regarding violence against women and misogyny in general? Should social media companies censor? Are the feelings of a minority group worth censoring another minority group?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/29/busin ... pages.html

If your opinion that facebook should stop this, because violence against women is bad, what about offensive posts about Islam? Or Judaism? Or any other large faction with lots of influence and power? Where does it end? More importantly, remember when I said that social media companies still protect freedom of speech? What happens if they start losing money/respect/PR over it? How long can you justify defending the rights of hate mongers when it starts affecting the bottom line? These are US based companies, they are not the US. They have no obligation to the constitution, nor any other government. They are somewhat beholden to their shareholders.

TLDR: Women or the Freedom of Speech. Choose wisely.
PS I'll be keeping an eye out for any libertarian types; though I don't expect any surprises.
Last edited by sardia on Sun Jun 09, 2013 7:39 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Internetmeme
Posts: 1405
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 3:16 pm UTC
Location: South Carolina, USA

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby Internetmeme » Sun Jun 02, 2013 6:14 pm UTC

This is wrong, and I hope Facebook stands up to this group. Instead of wasting time attacking a website for little to no benefit (other than an annoyed userbase), they should put their resources to something better, and try to fix actual problems.
They could be helping to fix the pay or workforce discrepancies. For example, Nissan's management only consists of 6.7% women. By 2017, they plan to go to a whopping 10% female upper-management. Between 2004 and 2011, "the percentage of women had dropped from 22 percent in 2004 to 4 percent in 2011." Yet this group still chooses to work with Nissan; fairly hypocritical in my book.
Censorship is wrong, no matter the speech you're suppressing. Don't get me wrong: Facebook has every right to delete any post they want; just because they can does not mean they should.
sardia wrote:TLDR: Women or the First Amendment. Choose wisely.

Why can't we have both?
If someone wants to argue against womens' rights, someone else should be able to call them out on it.
Spoiler:

User avatar
Ormurinn
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 3:42 pm UTC
Location: Suth Eoferwicscire

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby Ormurinn » Sun Jun 02, 2013 6:45 pm UTC

Facebook is a privately run space, they can have whatever policy they want on whatever kind of speech they want, it's within their rights to ban the letter "Y" if they want to.

That said, "Hate Speech" as a category is ridiculous, laws against hate speech are an infringement of a fundamental human right, and the existence of laws making expressing an opinion illegal are a black mark of shame on too many countries legislatures.
"Progress" - Technological advances masking societal decay.

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby Telchar » Sun Jun 02, 2013 7:08 pm UTC

Internetmeme wrote:This is wrong, and I hope Facebook stands up to this group. Instead of wasting time attacking a website for little to no benefit (other than an annoyed userbase), they should put their resources to something better, and try to fix actual problems.
They could be helping to fix the pay or workforce discrepancies. For example, Nissan's management only consists of 6.7% women. By 2017, they plan to go to a whopping 10% female upper-management. Between 2004 and 2011, "the percentage of women had dropped from 22 percent in 2004 to 4 percent in 2011." Yet this group still chooses to work with Nissan; fairly hypocritical in my book.
Censorship is wrong, no matter the speech you're suppressing. Don't get me wrong: Facebook has every right to delete any post they want; just because they can does not mean they should.
sardia wrote:TLDR: Women or the First Amendment. Choose wisely.

Why can't we have both?
If someone wants to argue against womens' rights, someone else should be able to call them out on it.


Yeah, well why are YOU posting on a message board? Why aren't you out there fighting to stop systemic rape in Africa RIGHT NOW! GO!
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6782
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby sardia » Sun Jun 02, 2013 7:47 pm UTC

Ormurinn wrote:Facebook is a privately run space, they can have whatever policy they want on whatever kind of speech they want, it's within their rights to ban the letter "Y" if they want to.

That said, "Hate Speech" as a category is ridiculous, laws against hate speech are an infringement of a fundamental human right, and the existence of laws making expressing an opinion illegal are a black mark of shame on too many countries legislatures.

Your first statement is totally a copout statement. When you make such a claim, you don't solve the issue at all. Company X is a privately run space, they can do whatever they want...except if it starts affecting their bottom line.

For example, during the 1960s, you can run choose to run your private business any way you want. You decide to hire black people on equal terms with white people. You get run out of town by angry white townsfolk. You come back the next day as Ormurinn's twin brother, who runs his private business and segregates whites and blacks. Isn't it nice how that was totally within your rights? Are you telling me that you would stand up to an angry mob and stand by your principles? No, you merely said that the business owner has the freedom to be bullied by anyone who has the might to make it so. If the business owner is the one with the might, then tough luck to anyone who complains. That's my beef with your incredible non-statement.

As for the topic itself, I'd rather that we tolerate these disgraceful posts. They may have written terrible things, but censoring is not the tool I would have used.

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby Telchar » Sun Jun 02, 2013 7:56 pm UTC

Keep in mind that part of what they are objecting to are pictures and videos of rape and abuse with captions like "Should've stayed in the kitchen". Rape and abuse are illegal. If you post such things and claim that they are pictures of said illegal acts, we should take you at your word and take that shit down.
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

User avatar
Ormurinn
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 3:42 pm UTC
Location: Suth Eoferwicscire

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby Ormurinn » Sun Jun 02, 2013 8:17 pm UTC

sardia wrote:Your first statement is totally a copout statement. When you make such a claim, you don't solve the issue at all. Company X is a privately run space, they can do whatever they want...except if it starts affecting their bottom line.

For example, during the 1960s, you can run choose to run your private business any way you want. You decide to hire black people on equal terms with white people. You get run out of town by angry white townsfolk. You come back the next day as Ormurinn's twin brother, who runs his private business and segregates whites and blacks. Isn't it nice how that was totally within your rights? Are you telling me that you would stand up to an angry mob and stand by your principles? No, you merely said that the business owner has the freedom to be bullied by anyone who has the might to make it so. If the business owner is the one with the might, then tough luck to anyone who complains. That's my beef with your incredible non-statement.

As for the topic itself, I'd rather that we tolerate these disgraceful posts. They may have written terrible things, but censoring is not the tool I would have used.


I'm happy for a business to hire or not hire according to whatever principles they want. I don't think a business that refused to hire blacks would last long today though, considering theres a boycott of pot noodle for having packaging shaped like breasts.

Theres the rub - discriminatory businesses can only exist so long as a substantial majority of the population are in favour of them... but then, anti-discrimination laws should (theoretically, in a democratic system) pass only when there is majority support for them.

They get you to the same place. Businesses being easy to bully is one of the things that makes free trade and enterprise so great - they're very responsive to public opinion.

I'm glad you support freedom of speech. Very few people really do.
"Progress" - Technological advances masking societal decay.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:12 am UTC

sardia wrote:TLDR: Women or the First Amendment. Choose wisely.
PS I'll be keeping an eye out for any libertarian types; though I don't expect any surprises.


We can definitely have both. Sure, terrible people are free to espouse offensive ideas. The rest of us are equally free to call them idiots, and not support them by helping them spread their message.

If Facebook decides to forbid certain message types, I see no problem, so long as they're up front about it(as they appear to be in this case). If they go too far, they'll have to deal with a backlash as crossing social boundaries tends to, but I doubt that this risks that.

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby BattleMoose » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:21 am UTC

I actually support hate speech laws, for the exact reasons they exist. Unsurprisingly I think webspaces like Facebook should support them too, but that's my moral perspective of things.

I also appreciate that the US particularly favours freedom of speech, regardless of the harm it may cause minorities. Culture.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:34 am UTC

I don't particularly think we need a law to fix this. It sounds like Facebook is getting pulled in the right direction by public sentiment. From a libertarian perspective, that's pretty much grand.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby addams » Mon Jun 03, 2013 5:08 am UTC

Hate is a bad thing.
Hate speech is hate made audible.

The best argument I know of to not curtail written speech:

Protect Freedom of Speech.
That's how we know who The Assholes are.


It makes an interesting Bumper Sticker.
Facebook is very different from old fashioned written speech.

I know very, very little about Facebook.
The publication fees are quite low.

In the old days, it was an important choice, "what to publish?"
Now; Everything is published.

One person can write Right Wing Morally Ridged Theology in the morning,
Develop Snuff Films in the afternoon and go to High School all from home.

Hate speech does hurt people.
It is one of the steps of Violence.

I have no idea what the standards are.
Is it time to have a Justice System on The Internet?

If a person comes before the Community and is found guilty of Debasing The Common Resource then What?
That person's computer is disabled?
That person is no longer allowed to use the Internet for X number of days?

Trigger warnings have a place for Adult content.

Freedom of Speech was to be a protection for people like Me!
I wrote a statement and walked to podium.
At the podium I was required to give my full legal name and my real 3D address.

With Freedom comes Responsibility!
The FOX News people did not like me and knew where to find me and my family.

Freedom of speech was not intended to protect immature sexual deviants in a public setting.
For that those people may need private space. You can say anything you want in private!

Beating one another bloody is a form of foreplay for some groups.
That is fine and dandy.

If you do it in a place for me to see and hear without my permission it will upset me.
If you have non consensual sex or pretend to without a Damn good reason it should be a crime.

Yes. Even in 2D.
It is a small step from thinking about dong something stupid to talking about stupid stuff.
It is another small step from talking about stupid shit and writing about stupid shit.
From writing to doing is another step. It is a long way from thinking to doing.

It is a small step from writing down the details and justification to action.
I Know This To Be True!

That is what we are all trained to do when we Must do a difficult task.
Think it.
Speak it.
Write it. Clean that written copy up. Edit and then edit again.
Have other Facebook Friends edit, too?
Action. Follow your own directions. No more thinking required.
Evaluation. How did that work out?

These Jack Asses use Facebook to form creepy little stagnant eddies where they write about comiting crimes?
That is not a problem for you?

What would that be like in 3D?
Kafka and his best friends writing stories of despair?
Creepy. How do People find these things?

I Thank The Gods my computer does not find these things.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Darryl
Posts: 327
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 2:32 pm UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby Darryl » Mon Jun 03, 2013 1:19 pm UTC

sardia wrote:Right now, most social media companies, google facebook etc etc, run on a standard that mirrors the US version of free speech. The US version differs not because it is better, but because it is more permissive of hate speech and allows statements that would be censored in other countries, Europe included. Now these companies don't just do it because they are employed and based in the US, but because it is commercially profitable and it is in their interests for the free flow of information. Aka, they make tons of money off of information. This is looking to be an open and shut case right? Freedom and justice blah blah blah? What about if several women's rights groups pressure facebook to censor really really offensive jokes regarding violence against women and misogyny in general? Should social media companies censor? Are the feelings of a minority group worth censoring another minority group?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/29/busin ... pages.html

If your opinion that facebook should stop this, because violence against women is bad, what about offensive posts about Islam? Or Judaism? Or any other large faction with lots of influence and power? Where does it end? More importantly, remember when I said that social media companies still protect freedom of speech? What happens if they start losing money/respect/PR over it? How long can you justify defending the rights of hate mongers when it starts affecting the bottom line? These are US based companies, they are not the US. They have no obligation to the constitution, nor any other government. They are somewhat beholden to their shareholders.

TLDR: Women or the First Amendment. Choose wisely.
PS I'll be keeping an eye out for any libertarian types; though I don't expect any surprises.

Considering that Facebook already has terms of service that ostensibly say that those sorts of pictures are not fine, it's just a matter of Facebook actually enforcing said ToS.
yurell wrote:We need fewer homoeopaths, that way they'll be more potent!

HungryHobo
Posts: 1708
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:01 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby HungryHobo » Mon Jun 03, 2013 1:21 pm UTC

BattleMoose wrote:I also appreciate that the US particularly favours freedom of speech, regardless of the harm it may cause minorities. Culture.


though it's notable that while the US has the KKK it also tends to be a place where the opposition to such groups is strongest and a source of many very positive social movements.

meanwhile in the UK where they have such laws people can and have been punished for speaking out about soldiers in an offensive manner.

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2012/03/ahme-m26.html

A teenager posted this on his own facebook page back when the media were going on and on and on and on about 6 soldiers who were killed in Afghanistan.

“What about the Innocent families who have been brutally killed... The women who have been raped... The children who have been sliced up..! Your enemies were the Taliban not innocent harm[less] families. All soldiers should DIE & go to HELL! THE LOWLIFE F*****N SCUM! gotta problem go cry at your soldiers grave & wish him hell because that where he is going.”


He was charged with a “racially aggravated public order offence.”

Apparently soldiers are a race now.

while he's not exactly eloquent his point is a perfectly valid one: that 6 professional volunteer soldiers died invading a country and the media went nuts while thousands of dead innocent civilians get a fraction of the media attention.

And yes he was convicted.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-19604735
Ahmed told the court he was only trying to make his point that many other deaths in Afghanistan were being ignored and added he had no idea it would cause so much upset.


District Judge Jane Goodwin said Ahmed's Facebook remarks were "derogatory, disrespectful and inflammatory".


And ultimately this is where these sorts of laws actually lead, just another way to beat down people who offend authority.
Give a man a fish, he owes you one fish. Teach a man to fish, you give up your monopoly on fisheries.

elasto
Posts: 3749
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby elasto » Mon Jun 03, 2013 1:55 pm UTC

I agree it's quite extreme that he got convicted for that, but he only got some hours of community service and a small fine. And that's pretty much a worst-case example. 99.999% of the time people will be hateful, ignorant trolls and it'll fly right under the radar. He just got unlucky really.

Anti hate-crime laws are well-intentioned in general; They should save more lives than they cost - even with the occasional slight judicial overreaction like that one.

User avatar
yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby yurell » Mon Jun 03, 2013 1:57 pm UTC

Facebook has been known to block pictures of pregnant women breastfeeding (because breasts are for the sexual gratification of men and shouldn't even be hinted at outside that context amirite), yet allows pictures that actively encourage rape as a way to put women 'in their place'. I'm glad that they're starting to take things slightly more seriously now and actually do something about the more egregious examples of people trying to perpetuate a culture that actively harms others.
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?


Pronouns: Feminine pronouns please!

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby BattleMoose » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:09 pm UTC

@19yo says something completely outrageous and offensive

Lets look at the consequences of all of this.

Everyone now agrees that what he posted was unacceptable. He even apologized and has personally realized the harm his comment has caused, or at least he's claimed.

These are good outcomes.

If he gets anything more than a bunch of hours of community service I would be alarmed.

The views he expressed are completely counter active to a functional society and accepting culture, its important that everyone gets this. I would probably put it on par with shoplifting.

Apparently soldiers are a race now.


Not according to the British legal system. Although he was charged with racially aggravated public order offense that charge was dropped, way to mislead.



Now lets talk about the harm that hate speech can actually cause.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_among_LGBT_youth
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church

Bullying, with words, can and does cause actual harm to real people. Whether its verbal, at school or online or on a persons facebook page. A persons freedom of speech should not extend to spreading hate and abuse at people which in extreme cases can and does contribute to suicide. Thats not a right anyone needs or should have nor is it anyway constructive to any society.

When LGBT suicides are brought down to the national average, I may be willing indulge the idea of, indulging hate speech directed at such groups.

HungryHobo
Posts: 1708
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:01 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby HungryHobo » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:21 pm UTC

BattleMoose wrote:@19yo says something completely outrageous and offensive


his point was completely reasonable. I find it pretty hateful and offensive that he was charged for it. after all, there really were thousands of innocent people being killed and raped as a result of the actions of those soldiers and soldiers like them who volunteered.

He even apologized and has personally realized the harm his comment has caused, or at least he's claimed.

if you're in a courtroom and potentially facing jail what would you say?

just make sure to remember what was considered "outrageous and offensive" a few decades ago as far as most of the population was concerned. There's a reason actual positive social change tends to come outwards from the US. In other countries people get offended and believe that being offended confers additional rights on them.

but then this is pointless.

it's like arguing against the people who bring out pictures of children killed in terrorist bombings when calling for some right or freedom to be curtailed for the children, no matter what anyone opposed says they'll just look like assholes for siding against the poor defenseless children while just boringly repeating "no, even with all those dead kids it's not worth throwing away all these fundamental rights"

it's no way to win a crowd.

assuming you're coming from the "the government should ban that" angle:

Shall we just leave it as you don't consider freedom of speech all that important for it's own sake(except when it's for things you like and other people don't like) vs potentially improving the lot of some groups.
while the jerks who are your opposition aren't willing to throw away fundamental rights.
Last edited by HungryHobo on Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:41 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Give a man a fish, he owes you one fish. Teach a man to fish, you give up your monopoly on fisheries.

User avatar
stellify
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 2:45 pm UTC
Location: Lloegyr

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby stellify » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:39 pm UTC

HungryHobo wrote: his point was completely reasonable. I find it pretty hateful and offensive that he was charged for it.


All soldiers should DIE & go to HELL! THE LOWLIFE F*****N SCUM!


If that's your version of "completely reasonable", I would hate to see what you think is unreasonable!

Had he said, for example, "My sympathies with the soldiers' families, but we mustn't forget the innocent families who died as a result of the government's decision to start this war", THAT would have been reasonable.

HungryHobo
Posts: 1708
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:01 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby HungryHobo » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:45 pm UTC

stellify wrote:If that's your version of "completely reasonable", I would hate to see what you think is unreasonable!

Had he said, for example, "My sympathies with the soldiers' families, but we mustn't forget the innocent families who died as a result of the government's decision to start this war", THAT would have been reasonable.


THAT would have been "nice". "nice" and "reasonable" are 2 different things.

So people shouldn't be allowed to hate people who freely volunteer to go abroad and shoot foreigners or express that you hate them? because I'm having a hard time thinking of reasons which are more valid.

If someone said that all axe murders, pedophiles or people who talk loudly on their cellphones in movie theaters should die and will go to hell you wouldn't bat an eyelid.

but then that's the problem: how these things get enforced also depends on how respected a group is.
Give a man a fish, he owes you one fish. Teach a man to fish, you give up your monopoly on fisheries.

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby BattleMoose » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:53 pm UTC

HungryHobo wrote:his point was completely reasonable.


I understand the point he was making and it wasn't an unreasonable point to make. But apparently thats where you think the issue is and you are very wrong on that. The issue is the following.

All soldiers should DIE & go to HELL! THE LOWLIFE F*****N SCUM! gotta problem go cry at your soldiers grave & wish him hell because that where he is going.


after all, there really were thousands of innocent people being killed and raped as a result of the actions of those soldiers and soldiers like them.


We have absolutely no idea what those soldiers were or were not involved in. To link those specific soldiers to rape and murder without evidence is wrong. If you are unhappy about the consequences of the war, then direct your displeasure to the governments of the countries that involved themselves and ordered their generals and soldiers to undertake that war. Otherwise, individual soldiers are only responsible for the lawful conduct of themselves and not others.

There's a reason actual positive social change tends to come outwards from the US.


The USA lags behind Western Europe in just about every single metric on social change, from Universal Suffrage, Interracial Marriage, Welfare, Universal Healthcare, LGBT rights, Education and treatment of prisoners. Seriously?!

but then this is pointless.


You are just throwing up your hands and running away the instant someone actually disagrees with you.

Shall we just leave it as you don't consider freedom of speech all that important for it's own sake(except when it's for things you like and other people don't like) while the jerks who are your opposition aren't willing to throw away fundamental rights (assuming you're coming from the "the government should ban that" angle).


No we won't.

Freedom of speech is pretty damn important. There's one caveat though. Don't spread hate. This isn't complicated.

EDIT Ninjaed:

So people shouldn't be allowed to hate people who freely volunteer to go abroad and shoot foreigners or express that you hate them? because I'm having a hard time thinking of reasons which are more valid.


A lot of these lads volunteered to join the Armed Forces of their country, and is directed to support the interests of their own country. Soldiers don't get to choose their wars. If you have an objection with the war, then direct your objections at the people who actually chose to fight the war, the Government. Let me emphasize this for you, soldiers don't get to choose their wars.

If someone said that all axe murders, pedophiles or people who talk loudly on their cellphones in movie theaters should die and will go to hell you wouldn't bat an eyelid.


I would bat an eyelid. Don't assume things about me. The thing about rights is that they apply to everyone.
Last edited by BattleMoose on Mon Jun 03, 2013 3:00 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

HungryHobo
Posts: 1708
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:01 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby HungryHobo » Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:56 pm UTC

The USA lags behind Western Europe in just about every single metric on social change, from Universal Suffrage, Interracial Marriage, Welfare, Universal Healthcare, LGBT rights, Education and treatment of prisoners. Seriously?!


yes but the movements involved got going properly in the US.

It happens with a lot of things. for a non social example: seatbelts came out of the US but were actually widely adopted in europe first before being widely adopted in the US.

The first gay pride parade was in the US while homosexuality was still illegal in the UK. (it offended people after all)



BattleMoose wrote:Freedom of speech is pretty damn important. There's one caveat though. Don't spread hate. This isn't complicated.

right. so no spreading hate for the WBC then.

Let me emphasize this for you, soldiers don't get to choose their wars.


That line holds vastly more weight when you're talking about conscripts.When they're volunteers they do get to choose whether to be involved at all even if their involvement in particular wars are beyond their control once they've already signed up.
Give a man a fish, he owes you one fish. Teach a man to fish, you give up your monopoly on fisheries.

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby BattleMoose » Mon Jun 03, 2013 3:15 pm UTC

HungryHobo wrote:
BattleMoose wrote:Freedom of speech is pretty damn important. There's one caveat though. Don't spread hate. This isn't complicated.

right. so no spreading hate for the WBC then.


Copy/pasted out of the South Africa constitution. Again this isn't hard.

16. Freedom of expression

Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes ­
freedom of the press and other media;
freedom to receive or impart information or ideas;
freedom of artistic creativity; and

academic freedom and freedom of scientific research.
The right in subsection (1) does not extend to ­
propaganda for war;
incitement of imminent violence; or
advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion, and that constitutes incitement to cause harm.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promotion_ ... _Act,_2000

yes but the movements involved got going properly in the US.

The first gay pride parade was in the US while homosexuality was still illegal in the UK. (it offended people after all)


I cannot actually believe that you are actually trying to argue that the USA is somehow leading in LGBT rights.

HungryHobo
Posts: 1708
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:01 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby HungryHobo » Mon Jun 03, 2013 3:33 pm UTC

BattleMoose wrote:I cannot actually believe that you are actually trying to argue that the USA is somehow leading in LGBT rights.

again. I'm not saying it currently does. hell I'm not even saying it ever did lead the world.

It is however good at exporting change to other countries then following the crowd later.

Copy/pasted out of the South Africa constitution. Again this isn't hard.


you could have just said "yes, no spreading hate for the WBC"
Give a man a fish, he owes you one fish. Teach a man to fish, you give up your monopoly on fisheries.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Mon Jun 03, 2013 4:41 pm UTC

BattleMoose wrote:The views he expressed are completely counter active to a functional society and accepting culture, its important that everyone gets this.

Everyone says this about every political view that they oppose.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

Derek
Posts: 2180
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby Derek » Mon Jun 03, 2013 4:52 pm UTC

BattleMoose wrote:Freedom of speech is pretty damn important. There's one caveat though. Don't spread hate. This isn't complicated.

Your hatred of freedom of speech is offensive to me.

User avatar
Angua
Don't call her Delphine.
Posts: 5926
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:42 pm UTC
Location: UK/[St. Kitts and] Nevis Occasionally, I migrate to the US for a bit

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby Angua » Mon Jun 03, 2013 5:10 pm UTC

HungryHobo wrote:
BattleMoose wrote:I cannot actually believe that you are actually trying to argue that the USA is somehow leading in LGBT rights.

again. I'm not saying it currently does. hell I'm not even saying it ever did lead the world.

It is however good at exporting change to other countries then following the crowd later.

Looking at the wikipedia LGBT timeline,I'd say that as other countries were decriminalising homosexuality, and there was a German speaking out against anti-homosexual laws in the 1800's, the US can't really count as a forerunner there.

The US hasn't done that well at being in the forefront of racial equality or women's sufferage (when compared to other Western countries). So, citation needed on the US being instrumental in spreading social change.
Crabtree's bludgeon: “no set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated”
GNU Terry Pratchett

aoeu
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 4:58 pm UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby aoeu » Mon Jun 03, 2013 6:45 pm UTC

Girl slaps boy after he asked for a kiss on the street: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=38 ... =2&theater

Some (of the 2000+) comments there can probably serve as a case study. It shouldn't be too long until at least a few death threats appear

User avatar
sam_i_am
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:38 pm UTC
Location: Urbana, Illinois, USA

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby sam_i_am » Mon Jun 03, 2013 7:36 pm UTC

Facebook most certainly can(and probably does) allow for users to have a certain degree of control over their experience.

They can probably achieve the best of both worlds by tagging compliant groups and pages with something that tells potential users whether that area allows inflammatory posts.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby Xeio » Mon Jun 03, 2013 7:56 pm UTC

sam_i_am wrote:Facebook most certainly can(and probably does) allow for users to have a certain degree of control over their experience.

They can probably achieve the best of both worlds by tagging compliant groups and pages with something that tells potential users whether that area allows inflammatory posts.
"Facebook builds system for hate speech".

Probably wouldn't get them any good publicity.

User avatar
sam_i_am
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:38 pm UTC
Location: Urbana, Illinois, USA

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby sam_i_am » Mon Jun 03, 2013 7:57 pm UTC

BattleMoose wrote:Freedom of speech is pretty damn important. There's one caveat though. Don't spread hate. This isn't complicated.


If you feel like limits on free speech can be reasonable, than I sure hope you're prepared in case the tide turns on you on that front.

Maybe some religion might someday be offended by how you portray them.

A future might come where moral opposition to a war might be every bit as culturally taboo as hate speech is right now. It's happened before.

User avatar
sam_i_am
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:38 pm UTC
Location: Urbana, Illinois, USA

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby sam_i_am » Mon Jun 03, 2013 7:58 pm UTC

Xeio wrote:
sam_i_am wrote:Facebook most certainly can(and probably does) allow for users to have a certain degree of control over their experience.

They can probably achieve the best of both worlds by tagging compliant groups and pages with something that tells potential users whether that area allows inflammatory posts.
"Facebook builds system for hate speech".

Probably wouldn't get them any good publicity.


It's worked in the past. Have you ever heard of the ESRB or the MPAA?

User avatar
Red Hal
Magically Delicious
Posts: 1445
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 2:42 pm UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby Red Hal » Mon Jun 03, 2013 10:53 pm UTC

aoeu wrote:Girl slaps boy after he asked for a kiss on the street: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=38 ... =2&theater

Some (of the 2000+) comments there can probably serve as a case study. It shouldn't be too long until at least a few death threats appear
Personally speaking I think he deserved the slap. It was less than three seconds from initial approach to leaning in for a kiss, way to invade someone's space.
Lost Greatest Silent Baby X Y Z. "There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain..."

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6782
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby sardia » Tue Jun 04, 2013 1:23 am UTC

stellify wrote:
HungryHobo wrote: his point was completely reasonable. I find it pretty hateful and offensive that he was charged for it.


All soldiers should DIE & go to HELL! THE LOWLIFE F*****N SCUM!


If that's your version of "completely reasonable", I would hate to see what you think is unreasonable!

Had he said, for example, "My sympathies with the soldiers' families, but we mustn't forget the innocent families who died as a result of the government's decision to start this war", THAT would have been reasonable.

Unreasonable? I'd put it somewhere of advocating violence that demonstrates before a jury of their peers that the man is a clear and present danger. If that is too high of a standard, I'd be ok with probable cause that he was inciting violence. If I posted that George Bush is a war criminal and deserves to be put down like a dog. Should I be charged? No? What if I posted that the king of Thailand is a pussy who's get's sand in his crotch every time someone insults him? You're ok with me being hauled off to jail? What if I called for Assad, the leader of Syria to step down, along with the rest of his government? Should I be charged and hauled off to jail? Or does it only work when it fits your preconceived notions of what is just and noble? Facebook, Google, and twitter aren't a UK based company, they're a US company with global reach. Why would Iranians or the Chinese give a shit about what some dude said in the UK? Open your mind a little.

Tyndmyr wrote:We can definitely have both. Sure, terrible people are free to espouse offensive ideas. The rest of us are equally free to call them idiots, and not support them by helping them spread their message.

If Facebook decides to forbid certain message types, I see no problem, so long as they're up front about it(as they appear to be in this case). If they go too far, they'll have to deal with a backlash as crossing social boundaries tends to, but I doubt that this risks that.
That's disappointing to hear this coming from you. I'd expected a better answer than "might makes right, the majority rules." The problem isn't that facebook is supporting terrible people spread offensive ideas. The problem is these companies touch billions of people, and their only guidelines is what they were brought up with and their profit margins. For a guy who's a fervent defender of the 2nd amendment and who thinks Constitutional rights equates with inalienable rights, your half-hearted defense of the 1st amendment is a joke.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Tue Jun 04, 2013 1:44 am UTC

Which First Amendment is that? The First Amendment to the Constitution of Facebook? Or maybe the Freemasons put some invisible ink in the US Constitution prohibiting private organizations from moderating forums they host.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6782
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby sardia » Tue Jun 04, 2013 1:51 am UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:Which First Amendment is that? The First Amendment to the Constitution of Facebook? Or maybe the Freemasons put some invisible ink in the US Constitution prohibiting private organizations from moderating forums they host.

Ah, the crux of the matter. I posted this because I have a problem with facebook/google not having free speech protections. Right now they allow free speech because it's what they assumed everyone wanted. They could take it all away and just feast off the tons of data that the silent majority drops if they so choose. But they don't, they allow free speech, and I wanted to bring attention to extending that right to social media.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Tue Jun 04, 2013 1:56 am UTC

I'm not sure what you're saying. On the one hand you criticize facebook for "not having free speech protections" and you talk about "extending that right to social media." On the other hand you say twice that facebook "allow[s] free speech." Does facebook or does facebook not currently have a free speech policy?
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6782
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby sardia » Tue Jun 04, 2013 2:48 am UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:I'm not sure what you're saying. On the one hand you criticize facebook for "not having free speech protections" and you talk about "extending that right to social media." On the other hand you say twice that facebook "allow[s] free speech." Does facebook or does facebook not currently have a free speech policy?

Facebook doesn't have a real policy, they mostly muddle through with a team of "Deciders", just a bunch of young people staring at porn. Those few people in the ethics department look at the offensive material and judge whether or not to censor it. Currently it allows it within limits of public backlash. I was bringing attention to the push to enshrine free speech like net neutrality. Currently net neutrality is merely a nicety that corporations give us, not a right that they can't take away. Free speech is in the same precarious position, a nicety that corporations give us. While this is unlikely to affect an US citizen posting on facebook, it does pertain to other countries since they don't look as kindly on offensive language.

There is a major difference between a privilege granted by a corporation and an inalienable right. It is possible to have free speech without having a right to it. Does that clear things up a bit?

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Tue Jun 04, 2013 2:49 am UTC

So you are asking whether there should be a legal mandate for facebook to have a free speech policy comparable to that of US constitutional law, or something?
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby Telchar » Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:44 am UTC

The first amendment doesn't cover a group of private citizens trying to pressure a corporation into changing it's policy. You need to stop bringing it up in discussions like this.
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

HungryHobo
Posts: 1708
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:01 am UTC

Re: Hate Speech vs Freedom of Speech on Facebook

Postby HungryHobo » Tue Jun 04, 2013 8:59 am UTC

sardia wrote: Currently it allows it within limits of public backlash. I was bringing attention to the push to enshrine free speech like net neutrality. Currently net neutrality is merely a nicety that corporations give us, not a right that they can't take away.


The only context in which I've ever heard of anything like this is when a corporation is providing a service as a carrier. (not a social media site like facebook)

ie, if DHL is contracted to provide the postal service in an area and to transport your letters they should be required to carry what you send (bombs excluded) even if it's complaint letters about DHL and they don't get to drop or divert them just because they don't like what you're saying.

plus similar for backbone network providers. if they're providing a general purpose packet switching network they shouldn't get to block sites dedicated to complaints about their own service or sites promoting competitors services.


Telchar wrote:The first amendment doesn't cover a group of private citizens trying to pressure a corporation into changing it's policy. You need to stop bringing it up in discussions like this.

Some people take the position that the government should force facebook to do what they want. so it is relevant. though you're right that if facebook decided to do it freely then it would not be a first amendment issue.
Give a man a fish, he owes you one fish. Teach a man to fish, you give up your monopoly on fisheries.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests