SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for guy_
Facebook, Twitter and other social media companies have been given an ultimatum by the European Union: rid your platforms of hate speech or face legal consequences.
European regulators have been pushing social media firms to remove racist and violent posts from their platforms in a timely manner for years. Their patience is running out.
Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft and Google have all pledged to do more. In May 2016, they promised to review a majority of hate speech flagged by users within 24 hours and to remove any illegal content.
But the European Commission, EU's top regulator, said Thursday they are still failing to act fast enough. It said it would pass laws allowing the EU to impose punishments on companies that fail to act.
"The situation is not sustainable: in more than 28% of cases, it takes more than one week for online platforms to take down illegal content," said Mariya Gabriel, the EU's top official in charge of the digital economy and society.
The Commission said it will consider implementing new laws to tackle the problem if the online platforms fail to "take swift action over the coming months."
Source: http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/28/technology/hate-speech-facebook-twitter-europe/index.html
(Score: 3, Interesting) by tangomargarine on Friday September 29 2017, @07:14PM (8 children)
And Europeans complain about the U.S. imposing its rules on the rest of the world....the hypocrisy is thick with these ones.
Or is this just a straight-up Catch-22 they're trying to use to get rid of F/T/M/G? Either spend basically an infinite amount of money on hiring employees to manually filter out "hate speech" (because there's definitely a rigorous definition for that), "or face the consequences."
EU: I refer you to the response given in the case of Arkhell v. Pressdram
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 29 2017, @07:51PM (6 children)
Quite.
"Hate Speech": An invented phrase intended to mask the intolerant and repressive nature of neoliberalism by misrepresenting it as public virtue.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by http on Friday September 29 2017, @10:37PM (5 children)
Or, it's an observation that the communication patterns among practitioners and advocaters of genocide is remarkably consistent just prior to actual genocide.
.
White supremacists: "Blood and Soil!"
Reasonable people: "The Nazis promoted that slogan to make the notion of killing Jews palatable just prior to killing millions of Jews. We've seen this before and know how it ends if unchallenged, so STFU."
White supremacists: "You fuckers are so intolerant!"
White supremacists: ...kills someone who doesn't like what they're saying
Apologists: "Maybe we shouldn't have let them rile each other up to premeditated wanton violence, but free speech!"
.
Every phrase is invented. "Hate speech" is a useful concept in preserving public virtue. If you have a problem with that, you really need to look in the mirror and give it a high five... with your head.
I browse at -1 when I have mod points. It's unsettling.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 30 2017, @12:17AM (3 children)
Like BLM activists openly calling for "white genocide" on social media? What is the definition of hate speech? [twitter.com] Last I checked whites were a minority group worldwide so are they (and neo-nazis) a protected class? I have no interest in identity politics but it's interesting that Muslims, Blacks and Jews are allowed in-group preference while whites are not. I myself am no fan of the "blood and soil" crowd but you appear to be bias and bigoted against a certain group that contains individuals no less odious than extremists from any of the others. Perhaps it's you that needs to high five a mirror with your head? Cunt!
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 30 2017, @12:30AM (2 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 30 2017, @12:40AM
Ah, the sound of an anti-white SJW hoist by his own petard [soylentnews.org]...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 30 2017, @09:11AM
"... those using racial identity politics as the key component of their divide and conquer strategy are".
Perhaps I edited what I wrote and overlooked a word that scans near identically either way?
Cute mod needed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 01 2017, @12:21AM
Apologists for what? Free speech? I say we respect people's free speech even if something bad could happen at some unspecified point in the future, since I am not an authoritarian. I would rather risk bad things happening than abridge people's free speech rights.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday September 30 2017, @01:30AM
(playing the devil's advocate here, not being the devil)
There's nothing as "imposing rules on the rest of of the world" - they can geotag the (offending) message and not deliver it to audiences in EU.
Yes, I know about VPN and Tor, but this will make the responsibility of the user what content s/he posts or reads - if the message is deemed illegal, one can't rationally accuse social media of distributing content that's illegal in the country s/he lives in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford