Meta's Zuckerberg gets rid of fact-checkers

[Say it aint so]

Yes, they were. There was a well-coordinated propaganda campaign surrounding the pandemic. You may recall such phrases as "No one is safe until everyone is safe", and "pandemic of the unvaccinated", just to name two. Just watch this 11 minute video and try to convince yourself that there was not a coordinated disinformation campaign from the governments.

C'mon man. Not even the liberal fact-checking hacks at Snopes believe this nonsense.

Trump Didn't Tell People to 'Inject Bleach' for COVID-19. But Here's What He Did Say

Trump's confusing remarks near the start of the coronavirus pandemic were revived during the 2024 presidential campaign.

www.snopes.com

The government can always inform those they are responsible for. What they may not ever do is censor those who go against their approved narrative.

Sorry, I don't youtube medical advice. What I said was government was not crafting, or as you claim now "conducting well-coordinated propaganda campaign" of disinformation. And no, I disagree. To have no action against disinformation during a pandemic is failure.

 

[Aldebaran]

It does not concern me because the US Constitution provides freedom to news media and publication. If Mark Zuckerberg wanted the same freedom of speech that news outlets like Fox News have, he could register Facebook as a news media entity to gain that protection.

If Mark Zuckerberg registered Facebook as a news outlet, the Biden administration couldn't pressure Facebook on content. However, Mark avoids registering to circumvent FCC regulations while still claiming Facebook is news media. He wants to have it both ways.

He shouldn't have to register with the federal government in order to have Constitutional freedom.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

He shouldn't have to register with the federal government in order to have Constitutional freedom.

Is that your opinion? Because SCOTUS limits commercial freedom of speech?

 

[Aldebaran]

Is that your opinion? Because SCOTUS limits commercial freedom of speech?

Facebook is a social media platform for everyday people like us. Do you want for us to be limited by our own government about what we can say to one another, and for them to suppress whatever ideas and opinions they don't like?

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Facebook is a social media platform for everyday people like us. Do you want for us to be limited by our own government about what we can say to one another, and for them to suppress whatever ideas and opinions they don't like?

Facebook is a for-profit organization that generates revenue from user-generated content on its platform. Therefore, Facebook must comply with government regulations and rules applicable to for-profit entities.

When posting content on social media platforms, users do not retain “freedom of Speech” rights on the platform. It is advisable to review the Facebook user agreement for a comprehensive understanding of these terms.

“Everyday people like us” often click "I agree" on social media terms of service without reading them. If people read the terms of service on social media, they would understand the limited rights they have on these platforms.

I understand your point. Facebook and other social media platforms should allow individuals to freely express their views without government interference. However, such a law does not currently exist.

 

[probinson]

Sorry, I don't youtube medical advice.

Nice deflection. Neither do I.

What I said was government was not crafting, or as you claim now "conducting well-coordinated propaganda campaign" of disinformation.

Sure they were. The YouTube video I posted demonstrates that in spades. But instead of watching it to see the evidence, you made some tangential comment about not getting medical advice from YouTube, which I suppose is easier than addressing the evidence presented. Not very compelling, though.

And no, I disagree. To have no action against disinformation during a pandemic is failure.

I find that to be a remarkably naive and foolish position. But I guess you're OK with the powers that be determining what is and what is not disinformation. You know, since they did such a stellar job during COVID.

I guess you and I just think differently. Perhaps you're concerned that you'll be unable to spot the disinformation without the government's help. But that doesn't really concern me all. I have critical thinking skills, and I'm pretty good at spotting disinformation without some self-appointed aribiter of truth filtering what I can see.

 

[probinson]

Facebook is a social media platform for everyday people like us. Do you want for us to be limited by our own government about what we can say to one another, and for them to suppress whatever ideas and opinions they don't like?

Sadly, I suspect the answer for many people is yes, they do want the government to have the power to limit what we can say to one another.

 

[probinson]

It's hard for me to believe that anyone who lived though the pandemic years and was paying even a modicum of attention to what was happening can contend that there were not MULTIPLE, coordinated propaganda campaigns pushed by the government. Here are just a few I can think of off the top of my head.

• No one is safe until everyone is safe!
• Follow the science!
• My mask protects you, your mask protects me!
• Safer at home!
• Stay 6ft apart!
• Vaccines are safe and effective!
• The pandemic of the unvaccinated!

I'm sure there are more I'm forgetting. These messages were propagandized and plastered everywhere. Government health agencies had astronomical budgets for marketing campaigns surrounding COVID. These were indeed well-coordinated propaganda campaigns funded and pushed by governments the world over. And any dissenting opinions were actively censored.

Heck, Zuckerberg said on the Joe Rogan podcast that the government was pressuring them to take down TRUE INFORMATION about vaccine side effects because they might cause vaccine hesitancy. Think about that for a minute. TRUE information, that vaccines had been associated with myocarditis (as just one example) were censored at the behest of the government. But I'm sure the government was only acting in our best interest and not at all influenced by their BILLIONS IN TAX DOLLARS that they spent on vaccines.

 

[Say it aint so]

Nice deflection. Neither do I.



Sure they were. The YouTube video I posted demonstrates that in spades. But instead of watching it to see the evidence, you made some tangential comment about not getting medical advice from YouTube, which I suppose is easier than addressing the evidence presented. Not very compelling, though.



I find that to be a remarkably naive and foolish position. But I guess you're OK with the powers that be determining what is and what is not disinformation. You know, since they did such a stellar job during COVID.

I guess you and I just think differently. Perhaps you're concerned that you'll be unable to spot the disinformation without the government's help. But that doesn't really concern me all. I have critical thinking skills, and I'm pretty good at spotting disinformation without some self-appointed aribiter of truth filtering what I can see.

Youtube smootude. Not interested. If you have information showing where government was ""conducting well-coordinated propaganda campaign" of disinformation" given covid, then show it. And yes, I believe people like epidemiologists who spend their lives in that field are the best sources as how to handle a pandemic. And yes the SCOTUS requires government to substantial justify the interference with the right of free speech. Again, I personally think during pandemic with no cure in sight and the dead being stacked like cordwood and ICUs overan ran like their first responders, that is such a case.

 

[Laodicean60]

Facebook is a social media platform for everyday people like us. Do you want for us to be limited by our own government about what we can say to one another, and for them to suppress whatever ideas and opinions they don't like?

I was censored by FB for posting information on how to get healthy. I didn't mention covid or the vaccine. I do remember the arguments whether fb was a platform or content provider.

The below video below shows Penski talking about the government working with fb on misinformation.

White House ‘flagging’ posts for Facebook to censor over COVID ‘misinformation’

After Surgeon General Vivek Murthy had called on social media companies to get rid of problematic posts, Jen Psaki admitted the government’s involvement in looking to take down certain posts …

nypost.com

 

[Aldebaran]

Facebook is a for-profit organization that generates revenue from user-generated content on its platform. Therefore, Facebook must comply with government regulations and rules applicable to for-profit entities.

When posting content on social media platforms, users do not retain “freedom of Speech” rights on the platform. It is advisable to review the Facebook user agreement for a comprehensive understanding of these terms.

“Everyday people like us” often click "I agree" on social media terms of service without reading them. If people read the terms of service on social media, they would understand the limited rights they have on these platforms.

I understand your point. Facebook and other social media platforms should allow individuals to freely express their views without government interference. However, such a law does not currently exist.

Too bad, eh? Such a law would certainly be Constitutional. Can't have that! LOL!

 

[Aldebaran]

Sadly, I suspect the answer for many people is yes, they do want the government to have the power to limit what we can say to one another.

The thing is, these different companies, whether they be Facebook or any other company--they seem to adjust their policies based on the current government. Over the past 4 years, Facebook was all about "fact checking" and suppressing conservative views and ideas. Now, we're less than 2 weeks from a conservative presidency with a conservative majority in Congress, and suddenly companies are ditching their DEI policies, Facebook is ditching their "fact checkers", etc.
Seems that companies simply change their views to please the government.

Yet there are still those who claim government has no hand in censorship, or lack thereof.

 

[Say it aint so]

It's now a MAGA playground

"Among its changes, Meta loosened rules so people could post statements saying they hated people of certain races, religions or sexual orientations, including permitting “allegations of mental illness or abnormality when based on gender or sexual orientation.” The company cited political discourse about transgender rights for the change. It also removed a rule that forbade users to say people of certain races were responsible for spreading the coronavirus.​

​

Some training materials that Meta created for the new policies were confusing and contradictory, two employees who reviewed the documents said. Some of the text said saying that “white people have mental illness” would be prohibited on Facebook, but saying that “gay people have mental illness” was allowed, they said."​

​

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

This is sad. But, I do my own fact checking. But a lot of people don't. I learned to stay away from politics on Facebook or Truth or x. There's very little truth to them . If News stations can lie for years, get sued. And people still watch them. There's no hope any forum. Since they will just keep repeating lies.

 

[Aldebaran]

It's now a MAGA playground

"Among its changes, Meta loosened rules so people could post statements saying they hated people of certain races, religions or sexual orientations, including permitting “allegations of mental illness or abnormality when based on gender or sexual orientation.” The company cited political discourse about transgender rights for the change. It also removed a rule that forbade users to say people of certain races were responsible for spreading the coronavirus.​

​

Some training materials that Meta created for the new policies were confusing and contradictory, two employees who reviewed the documents said. Some of the text said saying that “white people have mental illness” would be prohibited on Facebook, but saying that “gay people have mental illness” was allowed, they said."​

​

​

Don't worry. If conservatives lose political control in 4 years, things like “white people have mental illness”, or "“white people are inherently racist” will be back in place once again.

 

[Pommer]

Don't worry. If conservatives lose political control in 4 years, things like “white people have mental illness”, or "“white people are inherently racist” will be back in place once again.

Political conservatives don’t have political control now, (nor in 9 days), President-elect Trump (et. al.) is a right-wing populist Leader.

 

[Aldebaran]

Political conservatives don’t have political control now, (nor in 9 days), President-elect Trump (et. al.) is a right-wing populist Leader.

They don't? Things sure are changing in the favor of conservatives quite a bit already. If that's not control, what is?

 

[Pommer]

They don't? Things sure are changing in the favor of conservatives quite a bit already. If that's not control, what is?

Old guard GOP conservatives are being excised from the Party, (I am sorry if this is news to you).

 

[Aldebaran]

Old guard GOP conservatives are being excised from the Party, (I am sorry if this is news to you).

You mean like Trump, Rubio, Cruz, etc. are being excised? Yep, that's news.
Perhaps you don't notice plenty of dems joining with the GOP, even if not switching parties: Fetterman, RFK jr, Musk, Gabbard, Zuckerberg, etc.
Either way, conservatives are taking control well before the inauguration, which by the way, plenty of liberal figures have contributed heavily towards.

 

[Pommer]

You mean like Trump, Rubio, Cruz, etc. are being excised? Yep, that's news.
Perhaps you don't notice plenty of dems joining with the GOP, even if not switching parties: Fetterman, RFK jr, Musk, Gabbard, Zuckerberg, etc.
Either way, conservatives are taking control well before the inauguration, which by the way, plenty of liberal figures have contributed heavily towards.

What a glorious time it is to be “conservative”!

Think of all of the changes that these fine people will bring to our divided Nation!