Independent journalist Michael Yon, best known for his work during the Iraq War, has accused Facebook of deleting his posts and his users' comments without reasonable cause. Yon now says that Facebook suspended him for a week after his complaint made the news.
Facebook has previously come under criticism for banning links to its competitor Tsu.co, suspending political cartoonist Ben Garrison for his "Crybabies" cartoon critical of campus protests, banning atheist cartoonist Bosch Fawstin, removing a comment calling for the strict separation of church and state, and blocking access to The Federalist article "Microaggressions and Trigger Warnings Meet Real Trauma".
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Independent Journalist Michael Yon Accuses Facebook of Censorship
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 42 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @04:22PM
the subject covers it all
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @04:30PM
You can protest or disrupt the operations of a private company.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday November 29 2015, @04:59PM
Legal has nothing to do with it. Yes they're legally allowed. Yes it is still censorship. Yes it is still vile.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30 2015, @10:53AM
Nobody stops you from making a private web site, and then nobody can stop you from posting whatever you want (except for the state, but that would be censorship in its original meaning). I don't see why you have to post stuff on Facebook. I wouldn't do that anyway, as I would want control over the stuff I post, not being on the mercy of a single company (you may say I'm still at the mercy of the hosting company, but moving a web site from one host to another is much easier than moving away from Facebook, at least if you only use standard tools to build your web site, which I'd consider to be highly recommended anyway). And in the absolute worst case, you still can put up your own server.
The only stuff I'd consider putting somewhere else is videos, but then, if e.g. YouTube blocks your video, moving to another video platform (Vimeo, MyVideo, …) should be no big deal; just upload the video again to the new site, and change the embedding links. And if all else breaks, you still can host the videos on your own server.
There are only two institutions that strictly need to be non-censoring: The state/country/other political entity (because that's the ultimate power that could stop you from doing anything at all) and the network providers (because while you can put up your own server, you cannot provide your own internet; the internet is infrastructure). For this reason, I also don't find it troubling if facebook (or some other internet platform) sets up limits on what can be posted there (I'm not required to use those services), but I do find it troubling if a network provider makes any restriction on the content that may go over the connection (other than a general provision "you agree to use the network only for legal purposes" which might be necessary to protect the provider).
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday November 30 2015, @11:37AM
So, you'd be okay if say I deleted your comment for trying to disagree with me? Yeah, didn't think so. World+dog know it's shitty. Which is why we don't do that here.
Libertarian assholes like me may say things people disagree with but we also don't deny them the opportunity to return the favor, unlike the social justice types who censor anything not fitting their narrative by any means necessary. Dunno about you but I'm absolutely certain which I'd rather have at the helm of a site dedicated to speech and it absolutely does affect which sites I'm willing to support.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Tramii on Monday November 30 2015, @05:55PM
So, you'd be okay if say I deleted your comment for trying to disagree with me?
We wouldn't be okay with that only because this site claims *not* to do that. If you put up a website and said you would allow people to make comments, but as the owner you reserved the right to remove/delete any posts you didn't like, then yes I would be okay with that.
(Score: 2) by CirclesInSand on Tuesday December 01 2015, @09:38AM
Hardly. Government censorship is prosecuting people who speak freely. Private censorship is refusing to subsidize people speaking freely.
Government censorship should be met with violence. Private censorship is progress. They aren't even remotely related.
The confusion usually comes from the belief that private companies owe you something. That is what is vile.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Jiro on Sunday November 29 2015, @05:06PM
1) That only applies to legality. It is certainly possible for private companies to do things that are legal but unethical.
2) At any rate, if Facebook has a right to do it, he likewise has a right to rake Facebook's name into the mud about it for as long as he wants. He has freedom of speech too, you know.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by TheRaven on Sunday November 29 2015, @05:30PM
sudo mod me up
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 29 2015, @06:25PM
"explicitly granting them the power to control that communication."
Technically, true, yes.
However, no one actually willingly grants another party control over his communications. The average Joe clicks the EULA/TOS, out of coercion more than anything. Joe thinks, "I need to connect, Facebook is where everyone gets connected, so I have to accept the terms." Coercion.
I wish that I could make a stronger argument that Facebook is wrong, but that's the best I can do. It's "legal", so they get away with it.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by purple_cobra on Sunday November 29 2015, @06:49PM
Joe Public seems to have a bit of difficulty between "illegal" and "distasteful" though, at least here in the UK. Add to that the "there ought to be a law!" people and the various special interest groups (tabloid newspapers, non-tabloid newspapers, etc)...
I appreciate *everyone* is pretty much an individual special interest group, and even honesty about that is not going to help in many cases. That said, practising selective reading is helpful: if you don't like it, close the page and read something else.
On a slightly related note, I have noticed a greater push for the more right wing folks to comment on *any* story on the BBC news site, especially if there's some perceived bias to the other end of the spectrum. The current problems with the vast numbers of people escaping Syria and the effects of the war there result in some particularly venomous responses, as does anything to do with the welfare state. I wonder if there's been some sort of briefing amongst the Conservative Way Forward people to stridently espouse Randianism whenever they get chance? This is the same Conservative Way Forward that want to shift the Tory party somewhere to the right of the US Republicans and hence the entire British political spectrum with it, and is also embroiled in a pretty unpleasant episode regarding the suicide of one of its people. I'm 40-ish years old and I'm tired of all this nonsense already, but I suspect the only realistic way to make it all go away is to go and live in a cave.
(Score: 4, Informative) by jdavidb on Sunday November 29 2015, @06:52PM
However, no one actually willingly grants another party control over his communications
Exactly, which is why private media owners don't grant people the unconditional right to communicate using their media.
The average Joe clicks the EULA/TOS, out of coercion more than anything.
Saying "these are our terms under which we are willing to cooperate with you" is not coercion.
Joe thinks, "I need to connect, Facebook is where everyone gets connected, so I have to accept the terms."
If Joe is mistaken and you feel that is a problem, then you could work to educate Joe about his options, such as nearlyfreespeech.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Monday November 30 2015, @12:10AM
But is there anybody actually stopping him from speaking using other avenues? Nope. Sorry but when you deal with a private company you have to deal with their politics, their beliefs, and all that other shit that shouldn't have a damned thing to do with business but irl does. Look at YouTube banning Colin Flaherty for pissing off the SJWs and not following the political narrative, you deal with a private company you deal with their politics.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Monday November 30 2015, @06:16PM
Joe thinks, "I need to connect, Facebook is where everyone gets connected, so I have to accept the terms." Coercion.
My point is not that it isn't coercion, it's that Micheal Yon, by making his stuff available on Facebook, is a willing participant in this coercion. He is coercing others into using Facebook by using it as his preferred communication platform and then complaining that the power that he handed to Facebook has been abused. To Godwin the thread, it's like someone voting for the Nazis and then complaining when the brownshirts knock on his door.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 30 2015, @03:38AM
By using Facebook as your way of communicating with others you are explicitly granting them the power to control that communication. And, the more that you put on Facebook, the more that you're asserting that they should have control over. If you're fine with that, then keep on using Facebook and stop complaining.
Or complain a lot and attempt to strong arm Facebook to your point of view. I'm cool with that too.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @06:02PM
NO freedom of speach
But do you get freedom of smandarine?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Beryllium Sphere (r) on Sunday November 29 2015, @06:20PM
Malls are private property. They're also, functionally, the closest thing remaining to the old-time public square.
Recognizing the latter, courts have ruled that malls can't control speech on their property the way you can control visitors to your home.
Facebook is more like a mall than it is like my living room. On top of that it's set up for people to talk to each other.
That's just law, and ethics speaks louder and more clearly here.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @07:10PM
> courts have ruled that malls can't control speech on their property the way you can control visitors to your home.
To be clear, only two states have had courts rule that way and it is based on the states' constitutions going above and beyond 1st amendment protections.
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/do-you-have-free-speech-in-a-shopping-mall [firstamendmentcenter.org]
(Score: 2) by TheLink on Monday November 30 2015, @07:04AM
Which is why I find it funny that many US people keep railing against "Big Government" and blinding asking for "smaller government". It's quality of Government not quantity that matters more. A corrupt government can get smaller by "outsourcing stuff" to their friends/allies, and in many cases that just makes the bad stuff easier to get away with.
Because as you can see, many of those precious amendments and other "nice stuff" don't apply in CorporateLand.
You don't have freedom of speech in Facebook. You don't have the right to bear arms in Disneyland. It's not one person one vote when you select the CEO. And good luck using the Freedom of Information Act on Apple Inc.
And would you really want to try to force such stuff onto all corporations in the USA? You might end up forcing it on yourself first (so you can't shut people up in your own house), while the corporations off-shore most of the potentially affected stuff elsewhere just like they've off-shored their taxable profits.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by PizzaRollPlinkett on Sunday November 29 2015, @04:48PM
This story reminds us of the tragedy of walled gardens. No one asked this guy to wall himself up inside of Facebook. No one was forced to abandon the open, free internet. Anyone could set up a web site, back in the day, and publish anything they wanted. No one forced anyone into walled gardens. People abandoned the principles and benefits of the Internet to get into corporation-provided walled gardens. It's a tragedy that what made the Internet work in the first place was quickly abandoned by people using the Internet. They ran to corporations and began creating content inside walled gardens rather than building an open web of hyperlinked web sites. You can't say walled gardens are any easier these days than running your own site. You've got CMSes to handle content, Google News to index it. An open, distributed Internet would be hard to control.
(E-mail me if you want a pizza roll!)
(Score: 4, Insightful) by physicsmajor on Sunday November 29 2015, @04:54PM
An open, distributed Internet is hard to control.
That's why they are trying very hard to kill it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @05:18PM
Imagine if the ethics and implementation of Craigslist were applied to a "Facebook work-alike".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30 2015, @01:44AM
A ton of people asked him to wall himself in Facebook. Everyone who only engages in Facebook. You're confusing "nobody forced everybody to be on facebook" and "nobody forced any given person to be on facebook."
(Score: 0, Redundant) by Cornwallis on Sunday November 29 2015, @04:54PM
Water is wet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @06:07PM
Water can be solid you doofus.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @06:24PM
Dry water, AKA powdered water does indeed exist... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_water [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 29 2015, @06:29PM
Solids can be wet. I think that you meant water can be dry? It is pretty dry at forty below zero F.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @06:58PM
I know of one technical context for "wet" --- liquid in a solid container either "wets" the walls or not (for instance mercury at normal temperatures does not "wet" glass, but water does).
The OP was most likely referring to the sensation of wetness, which I believe comes from supersaturation with water vapor. In that sense, when you touch ice, it will feel wet first of all because anything you sweat out of the relevant pores will stay there, second of all because there will be a bunch of water that liquifies on contact with your skin.
And then you talk about -40 degrees, when I believe most human hands would freeze themselves before successfully melting a little bit of water... so I assume all of my above discussion can be ignored in that context (probably for anything below -37 centigrade in fact).
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Sunday November 29 2015, @06:48PM
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 3, Informative) by srobert on Sunday November 29 2015, @07:01PM
A while back, I said "Fork Slashdot!" (in a comment on Slashdot). I wasn't the only one who said it. Others got the same idea at the same time. Some of those people created Soylent News and here we are.
Facebook is even worse. If you say "Fork Facebook" on Facebook, they will censor it (and probably sue you). But we can say it here. If people don't like how Facebook operates, it looks to me like a business opportunity. Start a competing website with the advantage being that your version doesn't censor its users and perhaps allows the users to protect their identities (except as required by law).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @07:44PM
"Start a competing website with the advantage being that your version doesn't censor its users and perhaps allows the users to protect their identities (except as required by law)."
That would be https://ello.co [ello.co]
They got tired of Facebooks shit and made an anti Facebook.
(Score: 2) by Celestial on Sunday November 29 2015, @08:26PM
And look at how well that turned out. How many users does it have, again?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by zeigerpuppy on Sunday November 29 2015, @10:34PM
Diaspora is probably a better bet.
It's open source and federated so you can easily run your own server and communicate with other "pods"
It's far from perfect but worth a look
https://diasporafoundation.org/ [diasporafoundation.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30 2015, @11:28AM
On https://wiki.diasporafoundation.org/Choosing_a_pod [diasporafoundation.org] they write:
So in essence you're still locking yourself into a specific pod, unless you start your own. I also see nothing on their site on how easy/difficult it is to get your data out again.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Monday November 30 2015, @05:24PM
Diaspora is probably a better bet.
It's open source and federated so you can easily run your own server and communicate with other "pods"
It's far from perfect but worth a look
" rel="url2html-23223">https://diasporafoundation.org/
Diaspora is a wonderful idea. However, until we have consumer network connections that aren't throttled on the upload side, products like this will languish, IMHO.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Monday November 30 2015, @08:09PM
Only the pods need that, and actually it's becoming extremely common in urban areas. Around here (Rhode Island) that's all you can find. My FiOS is 50 megabits each way, my friends on Cox have 20, 50 or 75 megabits each way. Maybe if you're on DSL you still have an asymmetric connection, but you probably won't be running a social networking server off a DSL connection anyway.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Monday November 30 2015, @08:38PM
it's becoming extremely common in urban areas
I live in one of the largest cities in the U.S. and I can't get FIOS. I can get the crap provided by the cable companies, but they won't give me the six free static IP addresses (I looked into it, they want $20/month per address) I get now, and they will block server ports as well as proxy my email.
My ISP gives me free static IP addresses, a dumb pipe and no port blocking bullshit. That's worth the slower speeds to me.
There are serious issues with the current state of consumer ISP connections in the U.S., primarily due to a lack of competition. Good for you that you have something workable in your area.
Then again, can you run your own mail servers or host your own web services?
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Monday November 30 2015, @09:55PM
Interesting...we don't have *much* competition here (just Verizon and Cox) but that must be enough I guess. I'm on the outside edge of Pawtucket which is a few miles outside Providence which is still kinda small. Maybe we struck a good local monopoly deal? Convenient location between Boston and NYC? I dunno....
I do actually run several web servers, plus diaspora*, a YaCY node, and a mail server from my apartment. Although the mail server isn't actually sending/receiving direct from my network, it's just an intermediary step between Gandi.net and my devices (POP and delete from their server, then store and IMAP from mine). I didn't expect an outgoing SMTP server from my apartment would work out too well... :)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @08:01PM
Let's take a go at this together. Once we got it up and going and it starts to become a success, I'll Zuckerberg your ass and take it all for myself and cut your ass out. BAM! Instant riches, bitches!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30 2015, @12:29AM
Yeah, that' will work - look at the sort of people that do facebookie thingy.
(Score: 2) by DNied on Monday November 30 2015, @08:00AM
People who flock to Facebook are people who see nothing wrong with putting their online lives into the hands of a single corporation; even while having a fully decentralized worldwide network at their disposal.
Can you realistically expect those people to make an intelligent choice?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 30 2015, @10:09AM