Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

videl wrote

“We’ve had conversations with more than 20 members of civil society, academics, in some cases these were civil rights organizations, experts in race relations from around the world,” Brian Fishman, policy director of counterterrorism at Facebook, told us in a phone call. “We decided that the overlap between white nationalism, [white] separatism, and white supremacy is so extensive we really can’t make a meaningful distinction between them. And that’s because the language and the rhetoric that is used and the ideology that it represents overlaps to a degree that it is not a meaningful distinction.”

lmao did they really have to do all that for this simple fact.

7

Tequila_Wolf OP wrote

Yeah it's intense but also mundane to think that they need these experts, both so they can exonerate themselves of potential wrongdoing by putting the responsibility onto them and also because they are unable to do the basic ethical thinking there.

Examples of stuff they will ban are still so strong; you basically have to outright say you're a white nationalist. White nationalist talking points are too vague for facebook. But I guess if they banned every person who talked about white genocide etc. they'd lose a lot of people, so they're not in a rush.

3

__m106__ wrote

“We’ve had conversations with more than 20 members of civil society, academics, in some cases these were civil rights organizations, experts in race relations from around the world,”

I'm gonna call bullshit on that one, unless they happened to be referring to all the people that chewed them out for their lack of response (who probably also fit those descriptions). I'm sure that those 20 or so members could also negatively impact Facebook's profit margins hence the new measures taken here.

1