A step in the direction of safety or censoring the web?

Discussion in 'Tech News' started by pc747, Dec 9, 2016.

  1. pc747

    pc747 Administrator
    Staff Member Rescue Squad

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2009
    Messages:
    24,165
    Likes Received:
    5,230
    Trophy Points:
    1,123
    Ratings:
    +5,813
    [​IMG]


    Google and FB will be taking a step going forward to (try to) eliminate terrorist and hate based content from gaining traction and further inciting copycats. A move resulting from pressures from the European Commission, this can be done by removing such content from two of the most popular means of pushing such content on the web (FB and Google search engines).

    The question is whether this is a move that was long overdue or a step that is in the wrong direction?

    No one will question the move about (eliminating) the promotion of terrorist speech and propaganda that encourages the terrorist acts that have ravaged a multitude of countries and have cost countless of lives. But once you get out the realm of obvious (pro) terrorist speeches, who decide whether a speech by someone is hateful or just them sharing their opinion that may be adversarial to the popular views of the time?

    Not to try and compare speeches made by civil rights activists with terrorist speeches but at one time there was a group of people who saw such speech as hate speech or speech that needed to quieted. I know I am playing extreme devil's advocate here but the point is that I personally do not have an issue with FB and Google making such a move and believe they can navigate between speeches meant to incite violence and those meant to incite change.

    What are your thoughts?

    Source: The political fight behind Facebook and Google’s new terrorist content database
     
  2. Beardface

    Beardface Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    687
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    Ratings:
    +117
    The problem is, this was necessary to continue operations in Europe. They don't have the same laws we do in the States and you most definitely can be jailed for what they consider hate speech over there. They have already threatened social media sites to hold them criminally liable for hosting what they deem illegal and have discussed ways to cut off internet traffic to those domains unless they comply. They had to do this or they were in a world of trouble.
     
  3. lloydstrans

    lloydstrans Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2011
    Messages:
    11,764
    Likes Received:
    1,804
    Trophy Points:
    558
    Ratings:
    +1,842
    As the internet is a global in nature, there will absolutely be a clashing of the titans. Our wills against their wills. Does freedom of speech as the good ole USofA dictates, carry the same heft as a country that will jail you for placing a postage stamp of the queen upside down on a letter? Censorship tends to balloon once implemented. First it'll be terrorist sites then anti establishment sites right down the line until to simply opine about a certain someones orange glow will net you your FB account being locked down. If it was just a safety issue, the current status quo of blocking known IP addresses of known trouble makers is almost sufficient. A good system for reporting offensive content and a proper process to remedy such content.

    All is not fair. As we, Americans, can bash any and everyone, other countries populace can bash any and everything other than their country and government thereof. Who's rules do we play by?

    This is just a money grab. After FB and Google pay a "fine" this will just be water under the bridge. I'm leaning toward the 500 million each figure.