Facebook bans Alex Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos, Laura Loomer, Louis Farrakhan, as 'dangerous'

[KathyPartdeux]

Tougher gig though. No social media platforms or video - payment processors have dumped them.

I hear they take green stamps and completed Subway buy ten get one free sub cards now.

[hecep]

I envy what has to be your healthier, lower blood pressure, then.

@Brainspore

That’s exactly how I felt about you-know-who until he got that Celebrity Apprentice gig.

You were fortunate, then. We of pre-Celebrity Apprentice NYC couldn’t blink at a newsstand without seeing his puss in print or hearing of his shadiness. A rotten fixture, he was.

[jstnmbrwn]

Wake me up when someone gets around to de-platforming Zuckerberg, Facebook, Jack Dorsey and Twitter.

[hecep]

@Shuck

The use of the word “always” to mean “we just started,” seems non-standard, but whatever. Glad they’re finally doing it. Even if much damage has already been done, it’ll have some positive effects.

Very much agreed, although I won’t take their action seriously until they follow through on banning “individuals… that promote… violence and hate” by adding Trump to the list.

[pbasch]

Nobody is stopping the unfab four from starting their own platform. They can sympathize with each other about how their “rights” are being “infringed”.

[Brainspore]

@hecep

You were fortunate, then. We of pre-Celebrity Apprentice NYC couldn’t blink at a newsstand without seeing his puss in print or hearing of his shadiness. A rotten fixture, he was.

Huh. I remember seeing him in the media a lot back in the 1980s but I was never fully clear on who he was (except that he was supposedly rich and successful) or why I should care. I guess NYC just never got the reprieve that the rest of the country did after Wall-Street-worshipping era yuppie culture fell out of fashion for a while.

[alahmnat]

The Intellectual Dunked Web

[Quinquennial]

@ugh

Doesn’t Facebook qualify as a dangerous organization?

Just wait till Captain Kirk convinces Facebook of this…

[FGD135]

Good, but why now?

[Pensketch]

“We’ve always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology,” the company said in a statement.

They have? That’s news to me. Or is this “always” like, “We’ve always been at war with Eurasia”?

If they’ve really always done this, they sure do take their sweet time.

[GulliverFoyle]

@LurksNoMore

Good riddance.

…to bad rubbish.

[Adrian_Hillier]

So, they’ve finally shut the stable door that’s been banging in the wind for the last three years!
#betterlatethannever

[Gutierrez]

It’s always interesting to see the people who come out like Mike (@mccarthy104_) and complain about the First Amendment in these cases. I wish more people got that it prevents the government from silencing you but that it isn’t a problem for a private business to do so all they want. At least from a constitutional standpoint.

The First Amendment doesn't guarantee you the rights you think it does

[kiki]

I’m not sympathizing with any of these folks. Yiannopoulos and Loomer are obnoxious, hateful trolls. Farrakhan has been trading on hate for a long time. As for Jones, he has a complete disregard for the truth: his site is just the very definition of “fake news,” and he’s spread terrible CTs like the one that Sandy Hook was a hoax. But banning these accounts is the easy part. You know there are more people online out there pretty much like them, just not as famous. There are also always going to be borderline cases. Content filtering is not a science.

[gracchus]

@Gutierrez

It’s always interesting to see the people who come out like Mike (@mccarthy104_) and complain about the First Amendment in these cases.

That reminds me…

Freeze Peach (USA)

This is a thread to discuss the limits of free speech, both legal and moral, the consequences, both legal and social, and the best way to fight hate speech. I ask that everyone acknowledge that we all oppose hate speech, but we sometimes differ on what we see as the best way to fight it. There will also inevitably be some disagreement on what constitutes a threat under current laws in various countries, and what practically constitutes a material threat irrespective of laws. I ask that everyone…

[ficuswhisperer]

Great article, but I prefer the XKCD explainer that distills everything down to it’s most basic level.

Free Speech

[hecep]

To NYC way back when, he was a cancer cell, discrete to that location. Then… he violently metastasized into what body-US sees now.

[Jorpho]

@Pensketch

They have? That’s news to me. Or is this “always” like, “We’ve always been at war with Eurasia”?

If they’ve really always done this, they sure do take their sweet time.

Perhaps they’ve always banned individuals and organizations with no money and that no one was paying attention to anyway…?

[Pensketch]

Hmmm. I still think word would have gotten out somehow. I mean, I know they ban people. I just don’t believe it’s always been for the reasons they’ve banned these… gentlefolk.

[Shuck]

Yeah, I’m pretty sure the line they won’t cross is elected US officials, regardless of what they say or do. Still (slightly) better than Twitter’s fucked-up approach of not dealing with white supremacy to avoid that issue…

@ficuswhisperer

Your move, Twitter.

Don’t hold your breath…

Why Won’t Twitter Treat White Supremacy Like ISIS? Because It Would Mean...