Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, Microsoft and more join in support of strict new EU hate speech policy
55 replies, posted
[QUOTE]The European Commission along with several tech giants– Facebook, Twitter, Google’s YouTube and Microsoft, announced today a new code of conduct to remove hate speech according to community guidelines in less than 24 hours across the aforementioned social media platforms.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]The effort has been going on for several months, across Europe, to rid the Internet, especially social media, of content that has been spreading negativity like racism, hate, antisemitism and xenophobia. This crisis has been increasing online rapidly for the past couple of years.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE] The announcement reads:
In order to prevent the spread of illegal hate speech, it is essential to ensure that relevant national laws transposing the Council Framework Decision on combating racism and xenophobia are fully enforced by Member States in the online as well as the in the offline environment. While the effective application of provisions criminalising hate speech is dependent on a robust system of enforcement of criminal law sanctions against the individual perpetrators of hate speech, this work must be complemented with actions geared at ensuring that illegal hate speech online is expeditiously reviewed by online intermediaries and social media platforms, upon receipt of a valid notification, in an appropriate time-frame. To be considered valid in this respect, a notification should not be insufficiently precise or inadequately substantiated.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://thetechportal.in/2016/05/31/facebook-twitter-googles-youtube-microsoft-join-hands-support-eu-hate-speech-rules/[/url]
Absolutely NOTHING can go wrong.
The article doesnt really give much detail, but i'd be worried both that jokes could create danger of prosecution and that people will paint things they disagree with as racist and get the person persecuted for it. In particular im imagining anyone who has a not-racist argument about why limiting immigration numbers to amounts that can easily integrate is a good idea will be targetted under the "xenophobia" bit.
Also, silencing racist bigots doesn't make them less racist bigots, it just means they harbor an increased (justified imo) resentment due to being muzzled, and also nobody will ever get the chance to discuss with them or argue with them because they're not really allowed to speak their mind without fear.
Kill free speech on the biggest free speech avenues that currently exist to date? No big deal at all!
this totally wont be abused at all
[QUOTE=Monkah;50430746]Kill free speech on the biggest free speech avenues that currently exist to date? No big deal at all![/QUOTE]
Youll probably get a response like "their site their rules, fuck free speech on the internet" so im just going to preemptively respond that treating websites that are as huge as those mentioned in the OP as garage operations where dictatorship makes sense is very silly. These sites have become an integrated part in the world's communication networks and if they are allowed to, they will affect human discourse however it most benefits themselves with no fear of repercussion. And that is the set up to a dystopian scenario that could actually occur, if it hasn't already.
This is fucking stupid, silencing never works.
This will only worsen things up.
If banning the user doesn't work, they can also deploy squads of baseball bat wielding vigilantes to permanently silence the thought offender.
European Commission
Xenophobia
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm
the EU sure does love silencing people.
[quote]In order to prevent the spread of illegal hate speech, it is essential to ensure that [b]relevant national laws[/b] transposing the Council Framework Decision on combating racism and xenophobia are fully enforced by Member States in the online as well as the in the offline environment. While the effective application of provisions criminalising hate speech is dependent on a robust system of enforcement of criminal law sanctions against the individual perpetrators of hate speech, this work must be complemented with actions geared at ensuring that [b]illegal[/b] hate speech online is expeditiously [b]reviewed by online intermediaries[/b] and social media platforms, upon receipt of a valid notification, in an appropriate time-frame. [b]To be considered valid in this respect, a notification should not be insufficiently precise or inadequately substantiated.[/b][/quote]
This sounds pretty reasonable to me, they're talking about enforcing existing hate speech laws online and are requiring that complaints be specific and substantiated as to what law is being broken.
To those of you already calling this the death of free speech, is there something in particular you'd change about the proposal, or do you consider any regulation against (already criminalized) hate speech an infringement on your freedoms?
Where is FP hosted, btw?
...
Oh. [I]Right.[/I]
[editline]31st May 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Map in a box;50431163]the EU sure does love silencing people.[/QUOTE]
"First they came for the tumblrinas, and I did not speak out - because I did not have a Tumblr account.
Then they came for the youtubers, and I did not speak out - because I did not have a YouTube account."
I wonder how this will end... :v:
[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;50431467]Where is FP hosted, btw?
...
Oh. [I]Right.[/I]
[editline]31st May 2016[/editline]
"First they came for the tumblrinas, and I did not speak out - because I did not have a Tumblr account.
Then they came for the youtubers, and I did not speak out - because I did not have a YouTube account."
I wonder how this will end... :v:[/QUOTE]
We've always got russia and most of asia to move to
[QUOTE=Exploders;50431670]We've always got russia and most of asia to move to[/QUOTE]
But I've read that Vkontakte is spied on by the KGB! :O
[editline]31st May 2016[/editline]
Maybe we should all ditch our FB accounts and migrate to VK? :v:
This melodrama about the world turning into 1984 anytime the topic of hate speech laws comes up is really very tiring.
As far as I know there are no thought police in Canada, the UK and other countries with these laws.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;50431767]This melodrama about the world turning into 1984 anytime the topic of hate speech laws comes up is really very tiring.
As far as I know there are no thought police in Canada, the UK and other countries with these laws.[/QUOTE]
How would you imagine it actually occurring in the modern world, if not like this? It wouldnt come just all at once, it would need to be a slow process spanning decades, taking advantage of national tragedy and current events to move faster when possible. If you do it slowly enough, and always justify the next thing with the last thing "oh but we already have laws against hatespeech we're just properly enforcing them now", people will be way more willing to accept things they otherwise wouldnt be. Because its way harder to get loud peak protest when each event catches people at different times.
Seriously just have an actual thought experiment with yourself about how you'd go about it. Then maybe do [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNZrq2iK87k"]research on what has really been done so far[/URL] and see how closely your ideas match to the reality.
[QUOTE=Mattk50;50430745]Also, silencing racist bigots doesn't make them less racist bigots, it just means they harbor an increased (justified imo) resentment due to being muzzled, and also nobody will ever get the chance to discuss with them or argue with them because they're not really allowed to speak their mind without fear.[/QUOTE]
Seriously, this is why Trump exists in his current state. Screaming at people to stop having views you disagree with, or forcing them out of sight out of mind, no matter how horrid the views are, doesn't fucking work as a conversion tool or actually fix anything.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;50431767]This melodrama about the world turning into 1984 anytime the topic of hate speech laws comes up is really very tiring.
As far as I know there are no thought police in Canada, the UK and other countries with these laws.[/QUOTE]
Remember when that guy got arrested for teaching his pug the nazi salute. Yeah me neither.
I'm sure nobody's gonna abuse their power with this.
[QUOTE=Rockeiro123;50435420]Remember when that guy got arrested for teaching his pug the nazi salute. Yeah me neither.
I'm sure nobody's gonna abuse their power with this.[/QUOTE]
He got arrested for that? what the fuck.
[QUOTE=Mabus;50435436]He got arrested for that? what the fuck.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/09/nazi-pug-man-arrested-after-teaching-girlfriends-dog-to-perform/[/url]
[url]https://www.rt.com/uk/342513-dog-nazi-salute-arrested/[/url]
[url]http://metro.co.uk/2016/05/09/man-arrested-after-teaching-pug-to-do-a-nazi-salute-when-it-heard-the-words-sieg-heil-5870354/[/url]
“A 28-year-old man was arrested on Thursday 28 April in relation to the alleged publication of offensive material online (improper use of electronic communications under the Communications Act 2003).
I guess all those Alt-Right/Conservative pages are going to go down under now. Facebook has already been "silencing" them by lowering their reach through the fb algorithms. (no major loss)
[QUOTE=OGMatador;50435448]
I guess all those Alt-Right/Conservative pages are going to go down under now. Facebook has already been "silencing" them by lowering their reach through the fb algorithms.[/QUOTE]
No big loss.
In my eyes they're comparable to Islamic extremism.
They teach hatred, advocate persecution and offer an identity to losers who don't fit in with civilised society.
A friend of mine used to be a pretty reasonable libertarian guy. After watching bs on youtube and corrupting his mind with alt right bs he unironically believes there is a race war, supports eugenics and shooting refugees.
It's vile propaganda and lies. Till education is improved and people are better equipped to tackle this bs there needs to be something done to limit peoples exposure to it.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;50435489]
It's vile propaganda and lies. Till education is improved and people are better equipped to tackle this bs there needs to be something done to limit peoples exposure to it.[/QUOTE]
Oh god no, this is the worst idea ever and a huge kickoff to police state and filtered info that will return back to control you same way this propaganda does. Filtered info means you soon lose the idea of whats right or wrong because you're only ever presented with one side.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;50435489]No big loss.
In my eyes they're comparable to Islamic extremism.
They teach hatred, advocate persecution and offer an identity to losers who don't fit in with civilised society.
[/QUOTE]
Most of the time they justify their opinions with some pseudo-philosophical mindset
You're right though. They're mostly trying to appeal with disgruntled peoples and feed off their disdain for the modern world/ their current situation.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;50435489]
It's vile propaganda and lies. Till education is improved and people are better equipped to tackle this bs there needs to be something done to limit peoples exposure to it.[/QUOTE]
Okay no this is literally what the EU policy states what its doing, and will just lead to a slippery slope of censorship. They're "mean" people, but they deserve their right to speak. Everyone does.
Eventually only what the state/ "popular opinion" will be the only opinion to be allowed.
[QUOTE=rndgenerator;50435504]Oh god no, this is the worst idea ever and a huge kickoff to police state and filtered info that will return back to control you same way this propaganda does. Filtered info means you soon lose the idea of whats right or wrong because you're only ever presented with one side.[/QUOTE]
You can have a 2 sided discussion still.
You (the hypothetical person) can express your reactionary views while presenting a reasonable, rational and honest argument. Just don't use lies and emotionally charged nonsense to trick people into support you. Anyone opposing refugees for economical reasons I can relate to, just don't start using lies and fake/massaged figures to back up your arguments, don't misrepresent reality.
Ironically its the far right groups and authoritarians who are most likely to make a police state. Those same groups who whinge about "muh free speech" and "political correctness" when their old fashioned and divisive views are no longer welcome in civilised society.
[editline]1st June 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=OGMatador;50435505]Most of the time they justify their opinions with some pseudo-philosophical mindset
You're right though. They're mostly trying to appeal with disgruntled peoples and feed off their disdain for the modern world/ their current situation.
Okay no this is literally what the EU policy states what its doing, and will just lead to a slippery slope of censorship. They're "mean" people, but they deserve their right to speak. Everyone does.
[/quote]
sorry I seem to have badly worded my thoughts. People should be able to speak but they shouldn't be allowed to lie and trick people into believing something which isn't true. Especially when the consequences are hatred, violence and segregation.
One might argue that people can do research but they won't and don't think. The emotionally loaded "invaders are coming here raping our women" "enemy at the gates" bs make a much deeper and lasting impact than "migrants are less likely to commit crime than natives". People aren't equipped to deal with these polemics rationally. We can improve education or limit peoples exposure. Limiting exposure is a quicker acting fix than having everyone capable of fact checking and being critical about the situation. Doesn't help that media and governments blame immigrants for everything - a few years back it was poles and romanians, now the hatred is turned on middle easterners and africans, before that it was indians, before that jews, before that some other group.
[quote]Eventually only what the state/ "popular opinion" will be the only opinion to be allowed.[/QUOTE]
That would be rather dystopian. There is a middle ground though. Express your views but don't state opinion as fact and don't use lies/emotional arguements to misrepresent whats happening.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;50431767]This melodrama about the world turning into 1984 anytime the topic of hate speech laws comes up is really very tiring.
As far as I know there are no thought police in Canada, the UK and other countries with these laws.[/QUOTE]
Fuck sake, I could tweet something that can easily get me arrested up here. I really wonder what constitutes thought policing in your books because it sure looks like thought crime to me.
[QUOTE=Johnny Guitar;50437539]Fuck sake, I could tweet something that can easily get me arrested up here. I really wonder what constitutes thought policing in your books because it sure looks like thought crime to me.[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah, let's not forget the time a man got taken to court in 2012 for tweeting at 2 women.
[URL="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jan/22/canada-man-twitter-harassment-not-guilty-gregory-alan-elliot"]https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jan/22/canada-man-twitter-harassment-not-guilty-gregory-alan-elliot[/URL]
[QUOTE=Johnny Guitar;50437539]Fuck sake, I could tweet something that can easily get me arrested up here. I really wonder what constitutes thought policing in your books because it sure looks like thought crime to me.[/QUOTE]
Like what?
[editline]1st June 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Rockeiro123;50437635]Oh yeah, let's not forget the time a man got taken to court in 2012 for tweeting at 2 women.
[URL="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jan/22/canada-man-twitter-harassment-not-guilty-gregory-alan-elliot"]https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jan/22/canada-man-twitter-harassment-not-guilty-gregory-alan-elliot[/URL][/QUOTE]
This dude was harassing two women for months even after they blocked him so yeah that's pretty reasonable grounds to be subject to a criminal investigation and court charge. He was also found not guilty.
[QUOTE=catbarf;50431193]This sounds pretty reasonable to me, they're talking about enforcing existing hate speech laws online and are requiring that complaints be specific and substantiated as to what law is being broken.
To those of you already calling this the death of free speech, is there something in particular you'd change about the proposal, or do you consider any regulation against (already criminalized) hate speech an infringement on your freedoms?[/QUOTE]
It sets [b]horrible[/b] precedent for more.
[QUOTE=Johnny Guitar;50437539]Fuck sake, I could tweet something that can easily get me arrested up here. I really wonder what constitutes thought policing in your books because it sure looks like thought crime to me.[/QUOTE]
Like what?
