Search
Recent comments
- laughable....
8 hours 36 min ago - odessa....
8 hours 46 min ago - embarrassing....
8 hours 55 min ago - no hush!....
9 hours 19 min ago - genocide futbol....
9 hours 29 min ago - freedom....
11 hours 2 min ago - I love lucy?....
11 hours 54 min ago - self-sanctioning....
11 hours 57 min ago - joe loses it....
12 hours 10 min ago - pandora's jar....
17 hours 27 min ago
Democracy Links
Member's Off-site Blogs
at face value...
friendsFacebook’s Oversight Board, the handpicked band of outsiders charged with ruling on thorny issues at the company, handed down its first opinions after months of deliberation late last month.The results were underwhelming.
The board, which some have likened to a Facebook Supreme Court, ordered the company to restore four posts it said shouldn’t have been removed under Facebook’s rules (there was a fifth removal that the board upheld). The posts went back up — but almost four months after they had been pulled down.
The board has limited power. If it decides that a post should be restored or removed, Facebook has to comply. But the underlying policy reasons for their decisions are treated as advisory.
Facebook could, for instance, choose to narrowly interpret the rulings to serve its own business purposes. Worse, the very existence of the board could give Facebook cover to continue operating pretty much as it wishes, without instituting broad reforms.
“If Facebook wants to minimize the impact of the board’s rulings, it will be able to find differences in posts that we didn’t rule on,” said Michael McConnell, a board co-chair and Stanford Law School professor, in an interview, though he is “somewhat optimistic” the company would not do so.
John Samples, a board member and vice president at the Cato Institute, said it’s his expectation that Facebook would try to apply the board’s underlying policy behind its ruling to other posts, but “the Oversight Board does not have the bureaucracy to figure out whether they’re carrying that out.”
The board will also take on only a vanishingly small number of cases each year — it initially selected five out of 150,000 submissions — meaning the vast majority of other challenges will fall to Facebook’s own moderators. For now, the board is only reviewing cases where posts or accounts may have been improperly taken down. It won’t yet look at the trickier question of what content should no longer be left up.
The restoration of posts from October and November doesn’t feel quite like the sea change many have called for at Facebook, especially in light of the ample evidence showing the site was used to help organize the incursion at the Capitol.
Facebook needs to do more to demonstrate it is taking calls for reform seriously. The company should institute broader policy changes informed by the board’s findings, and added transparency around which posts are affected. It should also quickly expand the mandate of the board to include decisions about which posts and, even accounts, should be removed, rather than just which should be restored.
Read more:https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/05/opinion/facebook-supreme-court.html- By Gus Leonisky at 7 Feb 2021 - 4:42am
- Gus Leonisky's blog
- Login or register to post comments
in myanmar, facebook is the internet...
...
The military has asked internet providers to block the platform to ensure stability.
That throws into question the impact on the civil disobedience campaign against the coup, businesses and also the dissemination of public health advice on Covid-19 which happens largely on Facebook.
"It's really a violation of people's right to information and expression as well as freedom of speech - this is really crucial at a time when information is necessary to keep themselves safe from the pandemic," says Ms Fujimatsu.
People are now scrambling to find alternatives. Other social media and messaging platforms have seen a surge in users in Myanmar including Twitter, Signal and offline messaging app Bridgefy after the military temporarily disrupted internet access.
Facebook has said: "We urge authorities to restore connectivity so that people in Myanmar can communicate with family and friends and access important information".
It has also said it is now treating the current situation in Myanmar as an emergency and is actively removing content that praises or supports the coup.
The platform is a key factor in the civil disobedience campaign. Many users have changed their profile pictures to show support for the political party of deposed civilian leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
And given its history in the country, there is a sentiment that Facebook has an obligation to protect human rights and freedom of expression there.
So might this chip away at Facebook's importance? Observers think it's unlikely.
"People have also seen how easy it is to crack down on Facebook and how fragile communication is especially under the current military coup, so they will diversify where they get their information and how they communicate with each other in order to show their defiance," says Ms Fujimatsu.
But ultimately she and others believe Facebook is too integrated into the daily lives of people of Myanmar for people to move away from it.
Read more:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-55929654
I suppose that's why Trump has been kicked out of all the platforms on the internet... His supporters have been denied the daily ramblings...
falsebook looses the plot...
Under the Community Standards policy, posts with “debunked claims” that Covid-19 is “man-made or manufactured,” or that vaccines are ineffective, unsafe, dangerous or cause autism will be removed starting Monday, VP of Integrity Guy Rosen announced on the Facebook blog.
The new policy was implemented following consultations with the World Health Organization (WHO) and others, and will help Facebook “continue to take aggressive action against misinformation” about Covid-19 and vaccines, Rosen added.
Even if they don’t violate any of the listed policies, posts about Covid-19 or vaccines will still be subject to review by “third-party fact-checkers” and labeled and “demoted” if rated false.
Meanwhile, the company’s head of health, Kang-Xing Jin, announced that Facebook – along with Instagram and WhatsApp, which it owns – will be “running the largest worldwide campaign to promote authoritative information about [Covid-19] vaccines.”
In addition to “expanding our efforts to remove false claims,” Facebook is giving $120 million in ad credits to health ministries, NGOs and UN agencies to send out vaccine and health information to “billions of people around the world,” and providing data “to inform effective vaccine delivery and educational efforts to build trust” about the vaccines.
The social media behemoth will also help people “find where and when they can get vaccinated — similar to how we helped people find information about how to vote during elections.”
Read more:
https://www.rt.com/news/514977-facebook-covid-vaccine-campaign/
Read from top.
The more you discuss between enemies, the more chance for peace...
The less you discuss with friends, the more chance for harmony…Old Renuvisian proverb.
kill facebook...
Facebook's decision to block access to pages like 1800Respect, the WA Department of Fire and Emergency Services and the Bureau of Meteorology was unnecessary, heavy-handed and will damage its reputation, according to Treasurer Josh Frydenberg.
Key points:
Access to some pages caught up in Facebook's move — made in response to proposed laws that would mean it pays publishers for use of content — was being restored during the afternoon.
But Mr Frydenberg said the response from Facebook was "wrong".
"Their decision to block Australians' access to government sites — be they about support through the pandemic, mental health, emergency services, the Bureau of Meteorology — was completely unrelated to the media code, which is yet to pass through the Senate," he said.
"What today's events do confirm for all Australians, is the immense market power of these digital giants."
Facebook banned Australian users from accessing news in their feeds this morning, as the government pursues laws that would force it to pay publishers for journalism that appears in people's feeds.
Read more:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-18/facebook-credibility-brought-into-question-health-emergency-news/13166318
Please governments! Create an alternative way to inform people than through Fuckbook... People are not that lazy and can move about on the net and the media...
Tell people to get stuff from public websites. Fuckbook is a private enterprise that leeches from you and your friends...
facebook isn't not your friend...
The blanket ban was meant to target only Australian news publishers, and prevent users across the country from sharing and viewing news content, amid a bitter rift with the government over the News Media Bargaining Code.
The move, however, claimed dozens of collateral victims, wiping the pages of South Australia's government, the Western Australian Department of Fire and Emergency Services, local health districts in Sydney, several charities and cancer NGOs, and many others, even the Bureau of Meteorology.
Read more:
https://www.rt.com/news/515878-facebook-australia-ban-misfires/
compare images...
Facebook's "independent" panel of experts has passed the Donald Trump "football" right back to Facebook — and few are happy with the result.
Republicans are outraged. Democrats are unsatisfied. Facebook's sceptics are more sceptical than ever, and the company itself is back where it started.
Having set up the board of outside experts to adjudicate tough moderation decisions, it now has to make the toughest call itself: whether the former US president should be allowed back on the platform.
Facebook banned Trump earlier this year after deeming two of his posts had helped incite the January 6 storming of the US Capitol.
Read more:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2021-05-06/facebook-oversight-board-donald-trump-ban-ruling/100119958
Read from top
Compare the idea of the image on ABC and that on top...