Facebook Bans
- This topic has 39 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Just checked. No, the SWP are not covidiots. Their line is to criticise Bungling Boris’s handling of measures to deal with the pandemic. Common or garden populist stuff that vanguard parties specialise in, in accordance with Lenin’s tactic of trying to exploit any discontent to “build the party”.
Well, old Vlad (Lenin) was the life and soul of the party.
Good for Twitter!
The Socialist Standard would have been banned in the Soviet Union, China, and Eastern Europe. Lenin wrote on What is to be done? that there is no impartiality in the social sciences when the Bolsheviks created Iskra. Will the governments of Cuba and China allow a companion party of the World Socialist Movement?
I don’t see what Twitter want to achieve by banning people from expressing a false idea. It’s not going to change the banned person’s view or that of anyone else. And there will be plenty of other false ideas expressed there.
All I can think of is that they want to curry favour with the new administration to show that they can self-regulate in order to avoid being regulated by some outside authority.
But the First Amendment in the US on freedom of speech is sacrosanct, much more so than here in Britain, so expressing the false view that the elections were rigged will never be suppressed there. And why should it anyway?
“All I can think of is that they want to curry favour with the new administration to show that they can self-regulate in order to avoid being regulated by some outside authority.”
Aren’t you over-egging the pudding slightly? Twitter suspensions are nothing new and are made for a variety of reasons, based on alleged violations of Twitter’s terms of service, which are simply the legal agreements between the service provider and any person who wants to use their service.
Twitter, Google, and Facebook have been suspending accounts, users, political organization and government account for many years, what they are doing now is not new.
Socialists and communists organizations should not depend on social media and corporate organizations to propagate their ideas, they should depend on their own newspapers and journals like in the old days when newspapers were sold and distributed by members in the factories, offices, public meeting, and in the streets, and should not depend on recruiting members thru the internet, new members used to be recruited by personal contacts and political organizations used to provide political education and orientation to their new members.
Aren’t you over-egging the pudding slightly?
Maybe, but what is this section 230 they are all talking about?
I agree of course that Twitter is a private profit-seeking corporation and that it is free to exercise its private property rights in accordance with the “contract” you have no choice but to sign to use its facilities. What I was questioning, as well as the inefficacy of censorship as a way to try to ban the circulation of any idea true or untrue, was the logic of their position of banning someone for expressing a particular untruth but not others for expressing some other untruth.
As it’s a profit-seeking corporation there must be a commercial reason for this. I was trying to speculate on what it might be.
This article sheds some more light upon Twitter attempts at being the ‘good guy’.
Hannah Aren’t you over-egging the pudding slightly?
ALB Maybe, but what is this section 230 they are all talking about?
Section 230 generally provides immunity for website publishers from third-party content. At its core, Section 230(c)(1) provides immunity from liability for providers and users of an “interactive computer service” who publish information provided by third-party users:
“No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”
A new word for me
“…anarcho-fascist Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, 3 Percenters…”
anarcho-capitalist i have heard, national-anarchist i have heard.
Further to the Jimmy Dore video elsewhere on the forum
Reaching out to the “enemy”
An Open Letter to Patriot Prayer and the Proud Boys (CC: ANTIFA)
Facebook will halt algorithm-driven recommendations of political Facebook groups around the world and is looking into reducing political content in its News Feed, according to chief executive officer Mark Zuckerberg.
“People don’t want politics and fighting to take over their experience on the platform,” Zuckerberg told investors. “We’re going to focus even more on being a force for bringing people closer together,” he added.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/jan/27/facebook-earnings-stocks-revenue-fourth-quarter
Not at all sure what this means in real life and what effect may have on political parties such as ours.
Facebook will halt algorithm-driven recommendations of political Facebook groups around the world and is looking into reducing political content in its News Feed, according to chief executive officer Mark Zuckerberg.
“People don’t want politics and fighting to take over their experience on the platform,” Zuckerberg told investors. “We’re going to focus even more on being a force for bringing people closer together,” he added.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/jan/27/facebook-earnings-stocks-revenue-fourth-quarter
Not at all sure what this means in real life and what effect may have on political parties such as ours.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.