SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for chromas
Facebook calls for government regulation
Mark Zuckerberg says regulators and governments should play a more active role in controlling internet content.
In an op-ed published in the Washington Post, Facebook's chief says the responsibility for monitoring harmful content is too great for firms alone. He calls for new laws in four areas: "Harmful content, election integrity, privacy and data portability."
It comes two weeks after a gunman used the site to livestream his attack on a mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand.
"Lawmakers often tell me we have too much power over speech, and frankly I agree," Mr Zuckerberg writes, adding that Facebook was "creating an independent body so people can appeal our decisions" about what is posted and what is taken down.
He also describes a new set of rules he would like to see enforced on tech companies. These new regulations should be the same for all websites, he says, so that it's easier to stop "harmful content" from spreading quickly across platforms.
Also at The Telegraph, CNBC, CNET
(Score: 5, Informative) by seeprime on Sunday March 31 2019, @06:04PM (6 children)
I don't believe for a second that Zuckerborg wants anything other than a framework that he can point at and say "we followed the law". He and his minions will always take advantage of loopholes to increase profits on the sale (or "sharing") of personal data.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by canopic jug on Sunday March 31 2019, @06:08PM (3 children)
He's also looking to codify barriers to entry to ensure that no competitors have even the most remote chance of getting started. Low barriers to entry allowed companies to get established and Zuckerberg means to put an end to that in order to cement FB into place permanently.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 31 2019, @06:24PM
It is surprising how many people don't understand this. They're pulling the same con that Big Tobacco did.
(Score: 1) by RandomFactor on Sunday March 31 2019, @06:54PM (1 child)
This was also my first thought reading this.
I suppose, if you can't choke off the air supply of these nasty little upstarts by deplatforming and demonetization, the next step is to just get the government to drive them out of business for you.
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Sunday March 31 2019, @07:49PM
and while asking for these regulations, they'll also ask for tax cuts so THEY don't have to pay for it.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Monday April 01 2019, @12:37AM
You're sniffing down the wrong trail. What Zuck is doing is (re-)stating that he is willing to act as an authoritarian gatekeeper of information. Too bad he (I hope, at least,) is already on Trump's shit-list. Even normie scum are getting their news from Drudge and Zerohedge nowadays.
(Score: 1) by helel on Monday April 01 2019, @08:48AM
I have to agree here. Right now he faces bad publicity if he allows anti-vaccination posts, non-PC posts, and the like to remain on the site. With a government panel that such removal can be reported to either the US government has to get into the censorship game by agreeing "this speech is not protected" or they "force" facebook to allow these posts thereby allowing facebook to continue to advertise against them.