It's an obvious "following the local law" thingy, Facebook doesn't give a s*t, I personally reported 3 posts on different FB pages
1st was a religion extremist guy who says to Iraqi people that they should protest and fight the "other side" of the religion (aka start a new civil war) instead of protesting against the corrupted government.
2nd was a post that was praising the guy who murdered the Danish (Or was he Norwegian?) teacher who mocked Islam, and calling him a hero.
and the 3rd was a post that says "Women education is satanic, women's purpose is marriage".
all of these 3 reports was "The post was reviewed, and though it doesn't go against one of our specific Community Standards" and then it explains how to block blablabla... I don't report things anymore lol
I've given up during the time when ISIS regularly posted videos on social media. I've reported a video with a literal beheading about two thirds of the video in, and it didn't go against Facebook's community standards.
I guess whichever moderator saw it didn't bother to skip ahead during those like 5-10 seconds they reach their decision in.
Yeah, I've reported a bunch of stuff, all of it egregious. I have an inbox full of "thank you but this does not violate our community standards" to show for it.
Facebook has so much power with censoring only one side of the extremists. A good experiment would be if you could find a Christian priest to report, and check whether their response is weighted differently.
I think it is demonstrably proven that Facebook has no qualms about aiding and abetting government campaigns of crushing dissent across the world, despite its claims of "cherishing free speech". Facebook (and Twitter) has been doing the same in India [1].
It's the correct decision (although Facebook likely only cares about its bottom line). the YPG is designated as a terrorist organisation by the Turkish state and it's quite obvious that Turkey will want to exercise sovereignty over its communication channels rather than letting an opposing military force broadcast freely to its citizens.
It's not really the job of a private company to undermine nations in this way for simple reasons of sovereignty, and because even if Facebook were to somehow win in the short term, the five to ten year consequence would probably be that nations like Turkey decouple entirely and take control over communications back a la Russia or China.
It’s the wrong decision but no private company should be in a position to make it. The power that we have granted to centralized extralegal entities is obscene and we’re going to pay for it in blood if we don’t walk this back quickly by breaking up these orgs and building technologies that decentralize that power.
> It's not really the job of a private company to undermine nations in this way for simple reasons of sovereignty
That may be the case (or not), except this isn't a principled stance that Facebook is taking, but a business decision. Facebook have absolutely no issue with undermining a nation's sovereignty when it suits them.
For example, in protest against Australia's new News Media Bargaining Code, they went and blocked Australians from being able to share news articles.
It's not really the job of facebook to do anything or care about anyone. It's on you and me to force them to do anything.
Don't get me wrong, I will absolutely blame the corporate apologists when shit goes bad. It's assholes like you that create an abusive environment for the rest of us. Your hands are soaked with blood.
I had a nice long reply but had some time to simply fit.
The issue here isn't that Facebook is complying with a government's wishes it is that we don't hold our own governments liable first. As in, you should first blame your own government for turning a blind eye to events you find objectionable. People cheer on facebook and others here for locking out opinions they don't want, they just find a clean term to justify it (no fake news, hate, etc)
However to be blunt. No government is without issues and it would be a better use of your angst to clean up your own government before asking your government or a private firm to interfere in the actions of others. As in, police yourself first.
As a Turkish immigrant in Germany, I really find the word "expat" irritating. Why should I make it explicitly clear that my immigration happened on my own terms?
Apart from that, the sheer amount of Turkish immigrants who left the country in the last decade (including me) are not Erdoğan supporters. However, many of us refrain from heavy criticism as we occasionally go to Turkey to visit our relatives and we don't want some specific person having a bad day destroying our lives.
So you usually hear the other side and may mistakenly think that "expat Turks" support Erdoğan big time. The majority of votes he gets from Turkish immigrants are the Turks who left the country more than a couple of decades ago and partly, their children. The "why" has a complicated answer that touches religion, demographic dynamics and acceptance in society.
This shallow understanding of Turkish politics, is gonna come to impact western influence in middle east adversely very soon. More so European interests in short term, and US influence globally on the long run.
I have been reading comments similar to yours. Your view is nothing but naive / pure romanticism. There is a large amount of us (Turks of all opinions), just reading silently. Yet you are confident enough to straw-man whole Turkish side of the story into your shallow view.
This is very common. Turkey has a bad PR, and it's been useful to a certain extent for the West. But there is a point where unrealistic bad PR, causes ignorance like seen above. This is a divide between West and Turkey.
If this is an orchestrated divide. I don't mind West being so ignorant of Turkey.
“Never Interrupt Your Enemy When He Is Making A Mistake” Sun Tzu
So basically all world governments are locked in to their current state forever from the perspective of big tech, even if they are tyrannical regimes? Basically any group trying to invoke change will be labeled terrorists and will be censored and suppressed.
This is IMO the most valuable reflection of the whole thread. It can be seen as morals are conditional for big tech companies and depend of arbitrary circumstances like location
This is such a reductive argument. Are you saying that a private corporation is never responsible for its actions if they are compliant with a nations laws?
Is there no limit to what you consider OK for a corporation to do within a nations borders, as long as the action is sanctioned by the government? Do all corporations have literally zero responsibility to uphold any kind of moral that isn’t enforced in local law?
Before you dismiss it, follow that wormhole a little.
Should amazon and wikipedia restrict armenian genocide content in Turkey? I believe this is illegal too. How about random blogger or small publication... should they geoblock content by country?
How about speaking disparagingly about a King? That's illegal in Saudi Arabia, Thailand & other monarchies. Should facebook do something about this?
Layer on to this the fact that FB has a near monopoly on all internet use in many developing countries through facebook zero.
At some point "just following the laws" acquires a pretty sinister smell. Content distribution isn't peripheral to what FB does. It's what FB is.
The old-school Ataturkists who are the opposite flank of Turkish politics from Erdoğan’s party, were the very people who started this denial of Kurdish identity and territorial autonomy or independence. It isn’t just Erdoğan who has a problem with those Kurdish groups, it is Turkish society overall.
Should Facebook ignore Turkish law? Should they go by the US' terror organisation list instead? Should they maintain their own "terrorist list" alongside Turkey & the US'? Separate classifications of illegal or immoral content for in every jurisdiction?
You think there are political biases in American FB or Twitter? ... Try FB in a language or political context that no FB executive even speaks.
Meanwhile, there's chance (grumblings in europe, atm) that FB/Twitter will be subject to positive pressures as well. IE, making it illegal to exclude (eg) a political party from a platform. It doesn't take long before the same content is illegal in one jurisdiction and illegal to restrict in another. The Armenian Genocide comes to mind as a likely example.
Zuck is like a case study in "no morals" corporate culture.
OOH, saying yes to revenue streams worked out really well. FB "retargeting" and creepy personalized advertising won. The effectiveness of the ads, and revenue soared. Being "cutting edge" really, really paid off. It was creepy, but people got used to it. Scandals like Cambridge Analytica also passed. Other platforms (adwords) did it too, and FB doesn't stand out too much.
On the other hand, having no morals makes it very hard to navigate issues like censorship & moderation in multiple jurisdictions. This is exactly the kind of work morals were invented for.
Funny that you compare YPG to ISIS. YPG/YPJ (alongside others in SDF) where some of the most successful militia in fighting back against ISIS (so much that there where some strategic co-operation with US forces in fighting ISIS).
They also generally fight for Kurdish rights and, ethnic pluralism in general (saved several Yazidi towns from ISIS for example), women's rights and democracy (including forms of local direct democracy seen few other places).
The reason PKK and/or YPG/YPJ is on some terrorist lists is mainly because Turkish government is against Kurdish rights in general. Turkey tend to claim any group fighting for Kurdish independence and/or rights to be terrorists.
So if they're ”terrorists” in the same way apartheid South-Africa saw Nelson Mandela, ANC and others fighting apartheid as ”terrorists”.
depends on the pov. What's a terrorist to one side is a freedom fighter to the other.
from this month:
> ANKARA (Reuters) - Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said on Monday his ruling AK Party and its nationalist allies may start work on drafting a new constitution, less than four years after overhauling the previous constitution to grant his office sweeping powers.
the coup was justified and it's a tragedy Erdogan hasn't been removed from power. The AKP/Erdogan is no longer serving its people. Erdogan/AKP are the real "terrorists".
Remember that the invasion of Afrin was done by Turkey in conjunction with jihadist terrorist groups. Turkey has no problem with terrorism, only Kurds.
and? isn't FB doing the same everywhere, especially recently in the US? pretty sure they block whatever even smells like a pro Trump militia in the US.
This is a good approach. Country must be able to control content served to their citizens. And that ruling should not be extended to other countries. Citizens can either elect different president or use VPN.
[+] [-] Ahmed90|5 years ago|reply
1st was a religion extremist guy who says to Iraqi people that they should protest and fight the "other side" of the religion (aka start a new civil war) instead of protesting against the corrupted government.
2nd was a post that was praising the guy who murdered the Danish (Or was he Norwegian?) teacher who mocked Islam, and calling him a hero.
and the 3rd was a post that says "Women education is satanic, women's purpose is marriage".
all of these 3 reports was "The post was reviewed, and though it doesn't go against one of our specific Community Standards" and then it explains how to block blablabla... I don't report things anymore lol
[+] [-] input_sh|5 years ago|reply
I guess whichever moderator saw it didn't bother to skip ahead during those like 5-10 seconds they reach their decision in.
[+] [-] coffeefirst|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] laurent92|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] colejohnson66|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] toxik|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JIBitator|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] l8again|5 years ago|reply
[1] https://theintercept.com/2021/02/27/india-climate-activists-...
[+] [-] Barrin92|5 years ago|reply
It's not really the job of a private company to undermine nations in this way for simple reasons of sovereignty, and because even if Facebook were to somehow win in the short term, the five to ten year consequence would probably be that nations like Turkey decouple entirely and take control over communications back a la Russia or China.
[+] [-] throwaway316943|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] geoduck14|5 years ago|reply
Do I wish FB allowed the content? Yeah, kind of, but I don't actually understand if the YPG is a dangerous organization.
[+] [-] toomanybeersies|5 years ago|reply
That may be the case (or not), except this isn't a principled stance that Facebook is taking, but a business decision. Facebook have absolutely no issue with undermining a nation's sovereignty when it suits them.
For example, in protest against Australia's new News Media Bargaining Code, they went and blocked Australians from being able to share news articles.
[+] [-] monadic6|5 years ago|reply
Don't get me wrong, I will absolutely blame the corporate apologists when shit goes bad. It's assholes like you that create an abusive environment for the rest of us. Your hands are soaked with blood.
[+] [-] Shivetya|5 years ago|reply
The issue here isn't that Facebook is complying with a government's wishes it is that we don't hold our own governments liable first. As in, you should first blame your own government for turning a blind eye to events you find objectionable. People cheer on facebook and others here for locking out opinions they don't want, they just find a clean term to justify it (no fake news, hate, etc)
However to be blunt. No government is without issues and it would be a better use of your angst to clean up your own government before asking your government or a private firm to interfere in the actions of others. As in, police yourself first.
[+] [-] cblconfederate|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] egeozcan|5 years ago|reply
Apart from that, the sheer amount of Turkish immigrants who left the country in the last decade (including me) are not Erdoğan supporters. However, many of us refrain from heavy criticism as we occasionally go to Turkey to visit our relatives and we don't want some specific person having a bad day destroying our lives.
So you usually hear the other side and may mistakenly think that "expat Turks" support Erdoğan big time. The majority of votes he gets from Turkish immigrants are the Turks who left the country more than a couple of decades ago and partly, their children. The "why" has a complicated answer that touches religion, demographic dynamics and acceptance in society.
[+] [-] mclightning|5 years ago|reply
I have been reading comments similar to yours. Your view is nothing but naive / pure romanticism. There is a large amount of us (Turks of all opinions), just reading silently. Yet you are confident enough to straw-man whole Turkish side of the story into your shallow view.
This is very common. Turkey has a bad PR, and it's been useful to a certain extent for the West. But there is a point where unrealistic bad PR, causes ignorance like seen above. This is a divide between West and Turkey.
If this is an orchestrated divide. I don't mind West being so ignorant of Turkey.
“Never Interrupt Your Enemy When He Is Making A Mistake” Sun Tzu
[+] [-] umvi|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] botverse|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] discobot1|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hnarn|5 years ago|reply
Is there no limit to what you consider OK for a corporation to do within a nations borders, as long as the action is sanctioned by the government? Do all corporations have literally zero responsibility to uphold any kind of moral that isn’t enforced in local law?
[+] [-] bitcharmer|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dalbasal|5 years ago|reply
Should amazon and wikipedia restrict armenian genocide content in Turkey? I believe this is illegal too. How about random blogger or small publication... should they geoblock content by country?
How about speaking disparagingly about a King? That's illegal in Saudi Arabia, Thailand & other monarchies. Should facebook do something about this?
Layer on to this the fact that FB has a near monopoly on all internet use in many developing countries through facebook zero.
At some point "just following the laws" acquires a pretty sinister smell. Content distribution isn't peripheral to what FB does. It's what FB is.
[+] [-] te_chris|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jacquesm|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Mediterraneo10|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jmacjmac|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kingofpandora|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] m00dy|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] notum|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] creddit|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dannyr|5 years ago|reply
Facebook becomes the major, if not the only, online channel for citizens of a country.
Facebook adheres to orders of an authoritarian leader. Authoritarian leaders easily shuts out opposition to his/her regime.
Authoritarian leaders didn't have to spend much money and resources to do this. Facebook did it for them!
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] caseysoftware|5 years ago|reply
Is there a point where we call that the boundary between government and "private industry" is mostly paperwork and not reality?
[+] [-] jokoon|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dalbasal|5 years ago|reply
Should Facebook ignore Turkish law? Should they go by the US' terror organisation list instead? Should they maintain their own "terrorist list" alongside Turkey & the US'? Separate classifications of illegal or immoral content for in every jurisdiction?
You think there are political biases in American FB or Twitter? ... Try FB in a language or political context that no FB executive even speaks.
Meanwhile, there's chance (grumblings in europe, atm) that FB/Twitter will be subject to positive pressures as well. IE, making it illegal to exclude (eg) a political party from a platform. It doesn't take long before the same content is illegal in one jurisdiction and illegal to restrict in another. The Armenian Genocide comes to mind as a likely example.
Zuck is like a case study in "no morals" corporate culture.
OOH, saying yes to revenue streams worked out really well. FB "retargeting" and creepy personalized advertising won. The effectiveness of the ads, and revenue soared. Being "cutting edge" really, really paid off. It was creepy, but people got used to it. Scandals like Cambridge Analytica also passed. Other platforms (adwords) did it too, and FB doesn't stand out too much.
On the other hand, having no morals makes it very hard to navigate issues like censorship & moderation in multiple jurisdictions. This is exactly the kind of work morals were invented for.
[+] [-] TLightful|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mensetmanusman|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] komahirrimbuke|5 years ago|reply
"Senior US general explains rebranding YPG away from terror group PKK" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHpaIO-Pj10
[+] [-] torb-xyz|5 years ago|reply
They also generally fight for Kurdish rights and, ethnic pluralism in general (saved several Yazidi towns from ISIS for example), women's rights and democracy (including forms of local direct democracy seen few other places).
The reason PKK and/or YPG/YPJ is on some terrorist lists is mainly because Turkish government is against Kurdish rights in general. Turkey tend to claim any group fighting for Kurdish independence and/or rights to be terrorists.
So if they're ”terrorists” in the same way apartheid South-Africa saw Nelson Mandela, ANC and others fighting apartheid as ”terrorists”.
[+] [-] DyslexicAtheist|5 years ago|reply
from this month:
> ANKARA (Reuters) - Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said on Monday his ruling AK Party and its nationalist allies may start work on drafting a new constitution, less than four years after overhauling the previous constitution to grant his office sweeping powers.
the coup was justified and it's a tragedy Erdogan hasn't been removed from power. The AKP/Erdogan is no longer serving its people. Erdogan/AKP are the real "terrorists".
[+] [-] sneak|5 years ago|reply
Related: People claimed Cloudflare used to protect ISIS sites. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/nov/19/cloudflar...
[+] [-] kingofpandora|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nojokes|5 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Protection_Units
20 million Kurds not having a state despite their will to have it is a major injustice in this world.
[+] [-] supergirl|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thih9|5 years ago|reply
> [YPG’s page] can’t be viewed by Facebook users inside Turkey
> The page is still available on Facebook to people who view the site through U.S. internet providers.
And “enemy of Turkey”:
> Turkey considers the YPG a terrorist organization, although neither the U.S. nor Facebook do.
[+] [-] pjc50|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vbezhenar|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] atomicson|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] andred14|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]