I'll say this again:
We, as a society, across multiple governments and now the UN, with ample public support, are dragging Google and Facebook into the role of judge and jury of what is or isn't acceptable speech.
They may well eventually settle into that role, and come to like it.
I understand that the volume of information grew much faster than the traditional legal avenues for taking down illegal speech. And we're scrambling for a quick fix. But this fix may prove worse in the long run than the problem it fixes. These organizations may be relatively enlightened today, but there's no guarantee they'll continue to be 30 years from now.
“A couple of hours outside Yangon, the country’s largest city, U Aye Swe, an administrator for Sin Ma Kaw village, said he was proud to oversee one of Myanmar’s ‘Muslim-free’ villages, which bar Muslims from spending the night, among other restrictions.
‘Kalar are not welcome here because they are violent and they multiply like crazy, with so many wives and children,’ he said.
Mr. Aye Swe admitted he had never met a Muslim before, adding, ‘I have to thank Facebook because it is giving me the true information in Myanmar.‘“
Facebook doesn't spread hatred, people spread hatred.
Sure, Facebook could crack down on the way people are using their service/their tool, but I don't think they are responsible for the actions of users.
- Broadband internet is spreading hatred
- Chrome Browser is spreading hatred
- ISPs are spreading hatred
Don't blame a company, or the service they provide. A crackdown on Facebook will force the hating people to another tool or communication method. They'll probably move to a more encrypted method of communication, which will make finding the wrong-doings and the people much harder.
The only thing they could do is ask Facebook to cooperate and provide details to find the haters.
There were massacres before Facebook, and there will still be after it. As much as I dislike Facebook, they are just a platform and if they weren't here, another one will take their place so it's a bit weird the UN investigator would blame them directly. Ultimately people, not FB, are responsible for what they do, and for being too easily manipulated by online propaganda.
As much as I am concerned about Facebook's reach this story presents a rather narrow vision of the problem. The region has earlier seen people spreading hatred and misinformation through plain old SMS and MMS too.
The only way governments tend to control this is by blocking mobile/sms services. In this case unfortunately the only way around is to block Facebook or internet services until things calm down.
Too bad the Rwanda genocide happened in the 90s. If Facebook was around back then, we could have washed hands and blame them for that too.
I went to Myanmar at the beginning of 2015 for a few weeks, and was blown away at how many people had cell phones. It was only a few years before that phones were unobtainable due to extremely high sim card prices (only one provider). Once they allowed in competition (2 other networks), the price flew down to sub $1 per sim card, and in a flash everyone was online.
What really stood out was how much of the country ran on facebook. Groups for everything, pages for businesses, messenger for communication, etc. It resembled being in china and having everything run through wechat.
I guess this is one of those consequences.
It happened last week in Sri Lanka too. Although the government was quick to block FB i think 3 muslims died.
Amplification of a message is the problem and not being a medium of exchange of messages.
Facebook can/should only be held responsible for amplifying a message and should not be accountable for being a medium.
The information on 'Who' paid 'When' and 'How much' to amplify 'What' message/post to 'Whom' should be publicly accountable. This model should apply to any AD agency.
>Facebook was a huge part of public, civil and private life, and the government used it to disseminate information to the public.
Seriously? I know they probably have bigger things to worry about in Myanmar, but that's pretty crazy.
Why is Facebook to blame here exactly? I'm not a fan of the company at all, but, as I've said in earlier topics on more of less the same thing, I don't think it's fair to hold them responsible for what people post on there more than it is to hold internet providers responsible for people using their connections for the same thing.
yesterday I came across a YouTube video with 1M views where the expulsion of white farmers from South Africa was demanded. while they might have a point, the language in the comment section was so harsh that it cried for some form of moderation.
UN is to blame for keeping religion alive.