Comment by pino83
7 hours ago
But we are talking about Meta removing content from their own website, right?
In contrast to what people think, Facebook IS NOT public infrastructure.
If Meta removes some content from Meta website, and you don't like that, it's a you problem, right?
> Facebook IS NOT public infrastructure
They want protection from liability and also editorial control?
Regardless of the legal status, it seems clear that when massive companies refuse to allow the media they own to publish a dissenting opinion, we’re not headed towards a ~~more~~ democratic society.
That's clear. But with using Facebook for public discourse, you flushed all ideas about democratic societies down the toilet. Democratic societies should have their public discourse in public places. Not in commercial walled gardens owned by some US maniacs.
No problem with that as long as content responsibility is enlarged to all videos published on their platform.
Given all the sh*t that FB videos contain, I guess Meta's direction will soon be in jail.
They have to choose, safe harbor provisioning or responsibility for the content.
If they want common carrier protections I actually think it should not up to meta to remove things they don’t like.
why shouldn't it be up to Meta what content they remove from their website?
It's not even their fault that you misunderstand Facebook as a public space since two decades. It isn't. It never was. It's a commercial website. They let you upload your pointless vacation photos. That's basically it.