Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Friday September 27 2019, @08:20AM   Printer-friendly
from the We-don't-need-no-steenkin-facts! dept.

Facebook this week finally put into writing what users—especially politically powerful users—have known for years: its community "standards" do not, in fact, apply across the whole community. Speech from politicians is officially exempt from the platform's fact checking and decency standards, the company has clarified, with a few exceptions.

Facebook communications VP Nick Clegg, himself a former member of the UK Parliament, outlined the policy in a speech and company blog post Tuesday.

Facebook has had a "newsworthiness exemption" to its content guidelines since 2016. That policy was formalized in late October of that year amid a contentious and chaotic US political season and three weeks before the presidential election that would land Donald Trump the White House.

Facebook at the time was uncertain how to handle posts from the Trump campaign, The Wall Street Journal reported. Sources told the paper that Facebook employees were sharply divided over the candidate's rhetoric about Muslim immigrants and his stated desire for a Muslim travel ban, which several felt were in violation of the service's hate speech standards. Eventually, the sources said, CEO Mark Zuckerberg weighed in directly and said it would be inappropriate to intervene. Months later, Facebook finally issued its policy.

"We're going to begin allowing more items that people find newsworthy, significant, or important to the public interest—even if they might otherwise violate our standards," Facebook wrote at the time.

Source: ArsTechnica


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by rigrig on Saturday September 28 2019, @02:57AM

    by rigrig (5129) <soylentnews@tubul.net> on Saturday September 28 2019, @02:57AM (#899787) Homepage

    This is where most people are being so very, very wrong.

    We all assumed that when someone running for office lies, posts ugly rhetoric, contradicts themselves, threatens and bullies and so on, that they would be called out for it rather than elected to office.
    Because it seemed obvious that would happen.
    But it didn't, and Trump did get elected.

    From that we should have learned that our assumption was wrong, and we need to recalibrate our expectations.
    Even though a decade ago this would've sounded like some weird science fiction story, it seems we actually are living in a Post-truth [wikipedia.org] society.
    Which sucks.
    But denying it definitely won't make things better, and blissfully assuming that the next candidate to lie, posts ugly rhetoric, etcetera,wouldn't get elected because of those lies is just blatantly ignoring the evidence right in our faces.

    --
    No one remembers the singer.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3