|Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2020 - 12:38 pm: ||
Sorry for the persistence, I just thought it was a fair question and thanks for clarifying.
|Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2020 - 12:54 pm: ||
Oh, I think it was a fair question. I agree that Facebook is not a forum, at least this is not its purpose. The purpose of Facebook seems to be to collect information about its users and sell it to advertisers, see Cambridge Analytica. This is how Facebook makes money from their ''product'' aka 'you'.
|Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2020 - 01:19 pm: ||
It just seemed to me that YouTube should have a similar set of rules as the ones we use here.
I don't mind censorship when its terms are understood and I support the policy the Badweb uses.
Disclaimer- I posted something 10 years ago on YouTube, I have a Facebook page under a false name, and I use Google as a browser.
|Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2020 - 04:11 pm: ||
Blake: ''Of all the social media, Facebook seems the least authoritative. Zuckerberg seems to have taken some criticism to heart.''
He's trying to do that recently:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7955589/M ark-Zuckerberg-declares-Facebook-going-stand-free- expression.html
Mark Zuckerberg declares Facebook is going to 'stand up for free expression' and allow people to post what they want - but the CEO admits the new move will 'p**s off a lot of people'
Mark Zuckerberg hit out at 'excessive censorship' during a tech summit appearance on Friday, vowing that Facebook would stand up for free speech
The social media CEO said his company had previously tried to avoid being 'too offensive' but would no longer curtail to those against freedom of expression
Zuckerberg predicted the move would undoubtedly 'p**s off a lot of people' but would lead to the creation of a more authentic product
The company has been under fire for failing to ban or fact-check political ads on its pages
Facebook stocks dropped by 7.2 per cent Wednesday and the firm reported its slowest-ever revenue growth for the fourth quarter
(Message edited by Sami on February 02, 2020)
|Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2020 - 07:36 pm: ||
And bizarrely, George Soros is attacking Zuckerberg for being a Trump puppet.
He's not, but The Red Skull hates freedom of speech. ( Soros runs the closest thing to the comic book Hydra in real life )
|Posted on Monday, February 03, 2020 - 03:06 pm: ||
I agree, wish more places could have similar relaxed rules as here. I'm here on Blake's invitation, we've both experienced what unfair rules can be like.
Facebook denies Soros' accusation:
Facebook pushes back on Soros op-ed alleging 'special relationship' between platform and Trump
https://thehill.com/policy/technology/480934-faceb ook-pushes-back-on-soros-op-ed-alleging-special-re lationship-between
|Posted on Monday, February 03, 2020 - 04:39 pm: ||
It is a good question. We don't advertise BadWeB as a platform for free speech. We reserve the right to restrict any speech we so choose. That said, we're not legally liable for the content people post. I guess the difference is how we represent the forum versus how the big social media platforms have represented themselves.
I think afternoon may have pro-actively seen the light, thus their recent change of policy.
Facebook includes forums, the comment portions of posted content, and special groups that are managed as each forum/group owner sees fit AND according to Facebook rules and moderator judgement as well.
YouTube as well has forums, the comment sections of videos that offer that option. Those are administered by the owner of the associated video along with YouTube moderators.
Same for Twitter.
One big sticking point for YouTube is their child approved content scheme. It is being used nefariously to block content from schools and libraries that is in no way problematic except for its anti-PC factual content. PragerU is suing YouTube over the issue. It's taking a long time to work its way through the courts, but it may be one of the most important cases happening right now.
|Posted on Sunday, February 09, 2020 - 06:01 pm: ||
That's a clear explanation. Because of how these big social media platforms represent themselves, they can be sued for what is legally called ''tortious interference'':
Forums like BadWeB cannot be sued for tortious interference, but these big social media companies certainly can be sued for tortious interference.
YouTube is being sued by content creators for tortious interference. Cases like these are important and it will be interesting to see what the courts decide. From what I understand, content creators are in a strong position to win these cases.
|Posted on Saturday, February 15, 2020 - 04:17 pm: ||
Why there's no competitors to Youtube & the business lesson to be learned here
Basically, YouTube is losing money and Google may pull the plug soon.