Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
Why you should care: because free expression is wildly valuable to a society and defending it is a keystone principle of, at least, the USA
Am I suggesting a law has been broken: no lol
Is someone being harmed: yes; the censored people, the people who wish to read the censored information, and anyone else who may benefit from the content being available
|
I strongly disagree with your position.
Propagation of disinformation is harmful. Censorship of harmful information is helpful.
And now we're back to my point
Quote:
|
I think the quality and value of this idea of social distancing, and crucially, the motivation for the guidelines, is what is in dispute between, say, me, and the people saying their right to freely assemble is being abridged. Both sides are looking at the same thing, and seeing different things. I challenge the other side by saying my reasoning, increased chance of not transmitting the virus is more important, they say differently. I would also challenge them by reminding them that there are no rights without responsibilities. All our rights are exercised in a framework, all of them have limits of some kind. We have rules, right?
|
removing the social media content is what happened.
why it was removed is not clear and is in dispute.
one narrative is fb is doing the bidding of the tyrannical states.
one narrative is fb is enforcing their terms and conditions.
both narratives involve censorship (I'm self censoring my urge to surround that with scare quotes)
How YOU feel about whichever narrative you think is most likely correct is 100% on you; exactly the same for ME.
But we don't agree on what's really behind the takedowns.