Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday August 20 2018, @11:32PM   Printer-friendly
from the demanding-the-impossible dept.

From the BBC.

The European Commission is planning to order websites to delete extremist content on their sites within an hour to avoid the risk of being fined. The regulation would affect Twitter, Facebook and YouTube among others. The crackdown would lead to the EU abandoning its current approach - where the firms self-police - in favour of explicit rules.

The shake-up comes in the wake of high-profile terror attacks across Europe over the past few years.

Julian King, the EU's commissioner for security, told the Financial Times [Subscription required] that the EU would "take stronger action in order to protect our citizens".

The BBC has confirmed the details of the report.


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This discussion has been archived.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: 4, Insightful) by archfeld on Tuesday August 21 2018, @06:57AM (9 children)

    by archfeld (4650) <treboreel@live.com> on Tuesday August 21 2018, @06:57AM (#724070) Journal

    I can't disagree, but I'd also point out that a lot of Europeans get their entire view of the US from the same tainted news media. Having been a contractor for the financial industry and traveled and lived extensively in Europe, Asia, South America as well as around the US most people aren't that different and just want to live their lives quietly, and the news media in all those places makes money from over dramatizing anything and everything. Bad news sells and the Corps want money more than anything else...

    --
    For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by kazzie on Tuesday August 21 2018, @11:35AM (7 children)

    by kazzie (5309) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 21 2018, @11:35AM (#724125)

    I can't speak for the degree of "taint", but I am concerned that here in the UK, we are given far, far more news reports on the politics of the USA than of our immediate neighbours France and Ireland, for example. Why should the internal politics of a country a few thousand kilometers away be of so much more relevance?

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Immerman on Tuesday August 21 2018, @02:08PM (6 children)

      by Immerman (3985) on Tuesday August 21 2018, @02:08PM (#724165)

      You're right. Why should you care about the internal politics of a violent and increasingly despotic nation that still stands unopposed as the world's only military superpower? Especially one that has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to manufacture false charges to justify the overthrow and pillaging of other nations whenever the mood strikes it?

      • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Tuesday August 21 2018, @04:10PM (2 children)

        by Freeman (732) on Tuesday August 21 2018, @04:10PM (#724236) Journal

        You realize, that Russian is definitely a military superpower. China may as well be defined the same way as well.

        --
        Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Immerman on Tuesday August 21 2018, @04:25PM (1 child)

          by Immerman (3985) on Tuesday August 21 2018, @04:25PM (#724243)

          That's certainly what they'd like the world to believe - however, from what I can find the general consensus is that the US military would likely clobber either (or both) those militaries in a toe-to-toe conventional conflict, though the real-world outcome would likely be heavily influenced by politics and terrain.

          • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Tuesday August 21 2018, @06:08PM

            by Freeman (732) on Tuesday August 21 2018, @06:08PM (#724287) Journal

            Just because, you're the top dog doesn't negate the fact that others have similar power. In reality, anyone attacking any of those 3 would have signed their own death warrant. Any real conflict between those 3 powers while likely that the USA would come out "on top", it would be bloody and definitely put the entire world on edge. When you have the kinds of power that a Nuclear Arsenal gives you, it really is too much.

            --
            Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by kazzie on Tuesday August 21 2018, @06:01PM (1 child)

        by kazzie (5309) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 21 2018, @06:01PM (#724284)

        Oh, I fully appreciate that we should care about what big countries do, it's about how much we care compared to other things. I'm unsure why we (here) need to know every twist and turn in, say, a court case involving a US election campaign manager, details of a retired FBI director's memoirs, and accusations made by various prostitutes/$insert-preferred-term, yet were're lucky to hear more than a single bulletin per blue moon about current affairs in France? Or why we got to hear about ALL of the US presidential election from pre-primaries onwards, yet barely heard a snicker about the General Election in Ireland, a country we share a land border with?

        Tangentially, in the 1970s, my father lived in a house with two TV aerials; one for UK television, the other pointed across the Irish Sea. The variance in news bulletins (given the troubles in Northern Ireland) were very illuminating.

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Immerman on Wednesday August 22 2018, @12:40AM

          by Immerman (3985) on Wednesday August 22 2018, @12:40AM (#724488)

          I can't argue against that. Without having seen your news, I would suggest asking "Who profits from the kind and degree of attention being paid to the U.S.?", and perhaps "Who profits from the attention NOT being paid to nearer countries?" as well.

      • (Score: 2) by archfeld on Tuesday August 21 2018, @08:04PM

        by archfeld (4650) <treboreel@live.com> on Tuesday August 21 2018, @08:04PM (#724336) Journal

        Yeah, it would be awful if the US government withdrew its' trillions of $$$ of foreign aid from all those countries. I'd like to see the CIA ground into nutrient paste myself, and I would love to see the US armed forces less used by the Petro-Chem industry but there are dozens of nations that derive huge amounts of support in the form of food and financial support from the 'despotic' USA.

        --
        For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
  • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday August 21 2018, @08:09PM

    by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Tuesday August 21 2018, @08:09PM (#724340)

    True enough.

    I was just making the point that in most Western nations people travel overseas, and will be more likely to have actually visited America, whereas the average American seems to view foreign countries as on another planet or something.

    I live several thousand kilometres away from the US across an ocean, but I don't think I know anyone who hasn't actually been there.