Meta, X sign up to Euro Commish code of conduct on hate speech

Online platform companies, including X and Meta, have signed up to a new code of conduct aimed at targeting online hate speech, which the European Commission has now baked into the Digital Services Act. The DSA was passed in July 2022 to create "a safer digital space where the fundamental rights of users are protected and to …

[Guy de Loimbard]

I'd much prefer to notion

that if you don't like what you see or hear, ignore it.

But, I guess there's got to be something done and a bucket load of legislation is ALWAYS the way to get it sorted out.

Carrot and Stick or the Code of Conduct will be pointless methinks.

[codejunky]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

@Guy de Loimbard

"that if you don't like what you see or hear, ignore it."

That would assume the capacity for self control and being an adult. Look at how many are upset they wont be told what is the truth by the government on social media!

But I am with you on that

[Pascal Monett]

I totally agree with you there.

Self-control and being an adult. Add in common sense, and you have the perfect storm of what is lacking in adults today.

[Anonymous Coward]

>Self-control and being an adult.

Yes, especially if you are a Red-sea pedestrian, and everyone around you is doing Hitler salutes because that's what they saw on $SOCIAL - stop being so thin skinned

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

.... but being told what "is right" by Musk, Robinson, Trump, and the stream of online right wing grifters is ok, right?

It's obvious what you are replying, but the deranged truth denying conspiracy theory nutjobs are firmly part of your camp.

[codejunky]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

@AC

".... but being told what "is right" by Musk, Robinson, Trump, and the stream of online right wing grifters is ok, right?"

People can have opinions. However when the government decides it dictates the truth and enforces that even onto social media then no. Do you trust Musk, Robinson or Trump? No. Should you have some faith in your government? If you think yes then why do you want them acting like the people you mention?

"It's obvious what you are replying, but the deranged truth denying conspiracy theory nutjobs are firmly part of your camp."

>Biden laptop

>covid origins

>covid vaccine information

Just a few 'conspiracies' that turned out to be the truth.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

I don't trust the government blindly, either, or politicians on either side. So, I don't think they should go unchecked either.

It would be nice to give those I mentioned, along with the government, free reign to lie as they please, but the problem is there are morons out there who believe the lies, and worse, act upon them.

And granted, the left aren't immune to the spin - it used to be a non-partisan pursuit, but in the last 10 years or so, the right has made it an art form.

So come up with some real examples, and I'll agree, but the 3 you gave? All fake:

1) Sure, it was Hunters laptop, but all the claimed link to Joe was complete balls (and that was the crux of the whole "scandal")

Anyway, you'll be pleased to know that Trump has announced he's going to punish the FBI people responsible for debunking the bullshit. The right would be climbing the walls if Biden had done similar. https://apnews.com/article/trump-intelligence-hunter-biden-laptop-9d49578c70e3de03e628d0d0cf6592f0

2) No. Still no grounds to believe that.

An additional take - even if it does sometime get proved that the Wohan lab was the source of the leak, it still; doesn't vindicate the original comments which were not based on any fact.

If a black man moves into the community, and someone accuses him straight away of obviously being a murderer, that is racist.

If somewhere down the line the guy does turn on to be a murderer, it doesn't vindicate the racist who's argument was not based on objective reality.

3) Sorry, RFK, I'm not going to even indulge you on this crazy claim

[Steve Davies 3]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

COVID appeared under Trump 1.0's watch.

He invented the Vaccine before he left office (or that's what some claimed).

Don't forget the thing about Bleach killing it in an instant. That was most certainly not Biden.

As for Hunter... He was never part of the government and did not have Top Secret clearance unlike Trumps brood who made billions from their time in government. He admitted that he was an addict unlike someone very close to Trump 2.0

[UnknownUnknown]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

Covid is Schrödinger’s Virus in nut-job reality.

If both was created and is fake/doesn’t exist at the same time.

<shrug>

[codejunky]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

@Steve Davies 3

Your comment has little to do with mine so I will pretty much ignore it except for-

"As for Hunter... He was never part of the government and did not have Top Secret clearance"

He was a gatekeeper of Biden (mentally incapacitated and not knowing what he has signed) at one point after he was exposed as criminal. And who needs top secret clearance when classified documents are stored in Joes garage before even having the clearance to take them?

As for not part of the government, it seems very strongly that selling access to Joe was his artistic work.

[Andrew Scott]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

like all the visitors to mar-a-lago? seems to me that there's a current resident of the white house that's a convicted criminal.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

"And who needs top secret clearance when classified documents are stored in Joes garage Trumps bathroom before even having the clearance to take them?"

And what about X and what about Y and what about Z? LOL

[codejunky]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

@John Brown (no body)

"And what about X and what about Y and what about Z? LOL"

Crying whataboutary only really works when it isnt so directly related to what I responded to.

[Casca]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

codejunk is a right wing poster so he believes anything that is not coming from the government...

[UnknownUnknown]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

… even a Trump 2.0 Government?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: … even a Trump 2.0 Government?

He is having trouble adjusting to Trump 2.0 being so extreme. Give it a few days and he will have powered down, rebooted and applied all the necessary updates to allow Trump 2.0's decrees to get his approval.

/s

[codejunky]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

@AC

"I don't trust the government blindly, either, or politicians on either side. So, I don't think they should go unchecked either."

So we are in agreement.

"It would be nice to give those I mentioned, along with the government, free reign to lie as they please, but the problem is there are morons out there who believe the lies, and worse, act upon them."

But that is the only way to discredit stupid claims. They get made and people discredit them. If they are kept to the echo chambers then nobody challenges them and people believe and act on the lies. Which of course is the problem of the government enforced 'truth' which of course was highly damaging and people acted out in stupidity because discrediting was deemed heresy.

"And granted, the left aren't immune to the spin - it used to be a non-partisan pursuit, but in the last 10 years or so, the right has made it an art form."

I think you might have missed the last 10 years. Trying to pin this as on or the other is just daft and blinded. However pretending the last 10 years of severe state abuse against a man who is now President again is very dangerous.

"1) Sure, it was Hunters laptop, but all the claimed link to Joe was complete balls (and that was the crux of the whole "scandal")"

Nope, the scandal was claiming it wasnt Hunters laptop. That was the whole bull story government enforced 'truth' until Joe was elected. As for the link to Joe, actually that was part of an investigation which increasingly appears that Joe participated in Hunters questionable business affairs.

"Anyway, you'll be pleased to know that Trump has announced he's going to punish the FBI people responsible for debunking the bullshit."

Not limited to FBI, it was the whole corrupt bunch who put their name to the lie and potentially influenced the 2020 election. They severely abused their positions as 'experts' in support of a criminal!

"2) No. Still no grounds to believe that."

Actually you are seriously wrong. There is no evidence of covid coming from natural origins and the characteristics worked on in the labs and not found in nature point to an intentionally developed covid. The actual evidence of either vanishing due to China covering it up. At the time Trump seems to have been and still be right. The lab leak theory being banned by government until Biden became President and then it was an option again.

"3) Sorry, RFK, I'm not going to even indulge you on this crazy claim"

What crazy claim? And what RFK, I am merely talking about Zucks latest admissions how any negative yet truthful information about vaccination was to be banned as per government 'pressure'.

Ministry of truth is bad.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

>Chem Trails

>Pizza Gate

>Blood Libel

>Covid caused by 5G

>Microchips in vaccines

>Hollow Earth

>Flat Earth

>Adrenochrome

>DUMBs

>Elon Musk founded Tesla

etc, etc, etc,etc, etc ...

[sabroni]

Re: Biden laptop

Ha!

[codejunky]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

Oh wow I seem to have sparked some upset feelings there. All I did was point out the ministry of truth is a bad idea and exposed it isnt just a right wing thing.

How is this controversial? Have people been so brainwashed? Does the gov need to deliver some binkies?

[ChodeMonkey]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

"Oh wow I seem to have sparked some upset feelings there"

Seems people are concerned for you (about your support of conspiracy theories) rather than being upset. Are you okay? Have you been targeted by Jewish Space Lasers?

[codejunky]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

@ChodeMonkey

"Seems people are concerned for you"

Followed amusingly by-

"about your support of conspiracy theories"

Which of the list I posted was incorrect? Name one.

"rather than being upset"

Are you sure? Look at the insane responses posting conspiracy theories for them to argue against and obviously missing the point that government enforced 'truth' is bad.

"Are you okay? Have you been targeted by Jewish Space Lasers?"

What are you talking about? What Jewish Space Lasers? Are you ok? Is this some conspiracy theory you believe?

[ChodeMonkey]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

It's a MAGA thing:

https://www.newsweek.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-spars-piers-morgan-over-jewish-space-lasers-1843802

[codejunky]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

@ChodeMonkey

"It's a MAGA thing:"

I had never even heard of it.

[Steve Davies 3]

Re: I had never even heard of it.

He must be 'amanfrommars' reincarnated if that is true.

[MachDiamond]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

"All I did was point out the ministry of truth is a bad idea and exposed it isnt just a right wing thing."

It's very much a totalitarian government thing. I'm wary of government making claims about things that none of the politicians have any depth in and the experts they trot out are in the minority, inarticulate and their statements are shortened to spin the going narrative anyway.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

"However when the government decides it dictates the truth and enforces that even onto social media then no."

But when Musk does the same, it is ok?

Why a person should have power you don't want to give to government? Tell us.

Twitter is nowadays a personal propaganda channel for Musk. No more, no less.

And that + cash lifted him into inner circle of Trump. No problems with that either?

[SundogUK]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

"...deranged truth denying conspiracy theory nutjobs." Or as we call them, Communists.

[ChodeMonkey]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

Interesting. I did not realize there were many communists in the MAGA/QAnon community. Thank you for sharing.

[TheMeerkat]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

The Left never exercised control over themselves, bu5 the love to exercise control over wha5 others can say about them.

[ICL1900-G3]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

And they can spell better...

[MachDiamond]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

"That would assume the capacity for self control and being an adult."

That's why there will always be a need for moderation. The more generic the service, the more the need for moderators or any user fed system becomes choked with trolls that live miserable lives alone in a basement somewhere. I'm all for lively content, but when it devolves into ad hominem attacks and gratuitous swearing, I'm out.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

The problem with hate speech is it can get some folks riled up into violence. You've only got to look at the raging hatred against immigrants after that psycho teen murdered those three girls in Stockport. Someone claimed (incorrectly) that he was an immigrant and all hell broke loose.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

If you take a look at the information now released because of the guilty plea it's quite clear that the posts that stoked up the riots were not the primary problem. That was someone just on his own working himself up on everything from Gengis Khan to Jihad via Hitler - political labels don't really apply in such cases.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

I think you misunderstood me, I was referring to the subsequent violence by the mobs. One guy was even stopping cars looking for non-whites to attack. The guy who did the murders was a loon and probably a psychopath who indeed got himself all worked up. The issue I was raising was hate speech aimed against a particular group, blaming them for specific issues or problems in society in general. There will always be some folks who want to take that to the next level, violence.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

This is not a one sided issue. After Oct 7th 2023 groups have smashed up businesses (supposedly) belonging to and painted graffiti containing certain messages against another specific group of people. It just happened that the victims were the ones with the white and blue flag. And in fact in the US a woman vandalised a Greek restaurant as she could not tell the difference in the flag.

https://nypost.com/2024/10/25/us-news/montclair-residents-blast-tiktoker-who-ripped-down-greek-flags-thinking-they-were-israeli/

Talk about going with the mob!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

Yes, I agree it is not a one-sided issue. When any/all sides/groups start posting hate speech about another group, it doesn't tend to end well for anyone. When the hate speech is further compounded with lies and stereotypes about the other groups, it adds fuel to the fire.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

"I think you misunderstood me, I was referring to the subsequent violence by the mobs."

No, I do not. But they were responding to a trigger. We now know that there were missed opportunities to reel him in and he was the one who actually committed murders - possibly only lack of opportunity prevented others. An important factor here is that he had come to the notice of the police - he even had a conviction - but without successful intervention. This is an aspect where arguably government had an easier job and failed.

[Probie]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

Not sure I give a flying fuck on whom started it, I care about the outcome.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

The legal definitions of hate speech I've seen are things like "speech calling for, or likely to induce, violence toward a particular group". So "that thing they're teaching is immoral and they should stop" isn't hate speech, while "we should use force to make them stop" is.

[TheMeerkat]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

We have regular hate marches in London in support of Muslim Arab supremacists of Hamas calling for ethnic cleansing of Jews,

But disagree with them and you are talking about”far right”.

“Far right” is everyone who disagree with current woke dictatorship so being called so is a badge of honour these days.

[sabroni]

Re: We have regular hate marches in London

No, you don't. You apparently can't tell the difference between people who want to stop war and people who want to war.

You probably should do more thinking before you post. And maybe read from a few different sources?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: We have regular hate marches in London

The people you claim who 'want to stop war' are going about it in a very odd way as they seem to support terrorist organisations, call for violence against those they deem have wronged them and commit acts of vandalism and intimidation. This is a far cry from the likes of the CND protests in the 70s and 80s.

[UnknownUnknown]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

Southport FFS.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

I can't believe some nutter downvoted you for a factual correction which is easily verifiable! Maybe it was the OP and s/he really does believe they meant Stockport after all LOL

The OP ironically said in his/her own post "Someone claimed (incorrectly)" which just makes all the more funny your correction was downvoted :-)

I knew this comments section was going to be entertaining, but this really takes the biscuit :-)

[Probie]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

Yes I believe that would fall under a wide range of criminality as per here https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/public-order-offences-incorporating-charging-standard.

The big problem is not someone performing this act within my jurisdiction - it's some twat doing it outside of my jurisdiction. Any responsible Government must have the tools to exercise protection of its citizens, and if they platforms etc... are incapable of following or are undermining the law then action should be taken. This is just the laying of groundwork for the action to be taken, and honestly far more gracious than a Brazilian wax. https://www.ft.com/content/091839c5-41b7-49be-ae35-47f15ce22e5f

There is a second point here,

I do believe anyone has the right to free speech,

I believe that there are consequences to free speech,

I believe everyone speech is of equal value

I am not seeing the balance of equal in any social media platform, and there is a lot of hand wringing over consequence.

[Wang Cores]

Re: I'd much prefer to notion

Guy de Lombard, why haven't you apologized to your victims yet? Have you no shame?

Imagine how that turns a room against you and you can see why that fails.

[Anonymous Coward]

And I'd prefer that liars all fuck off and die.

But as USA has just demonstrated they are more than willing to believe lies and promote liars into power. then I suppose this is the best we have so far to deal with nazi saluting twats at this point in time.

[wolfetone]

He wasn't performing a Nazi salute.

He was just signalling which way he was going. He wants to take the fourth reich.

[Anonymous Coward]

To your downvoters --- woosh ---

[wolfetone]

To your downvoters --- WOOOOSH ---

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Tesla's don't have turn signals, he was just indicating

[Fruit and Nutcase]

He wants to take the fourth reich

Is that what happens he instructs Tesla Autopilot to "Take me home"

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Anyone tried putting "Stalingrad" into the sat-nav ?

[MachDiamond]

"Anyone tried putting "Stalingrad" into the sat-nav ?"

Stalingrad? Luxury!

It would be quite the feat if the starting point was in the US, but there are some very despotic/totalitarian regimes in South America to sample.

[Fruit and Nutcase]

South America was also the destination some unsavoury people after WW2

[Omnipresent]

Here, wear this star badge.

It will let us know who you are.

putin, probably.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

What exactly is hate speech and who gets to define it? Apparently, it's anything the government (Ministry of Truth) designates lies outside the boundaries of acceptable language (Newspeak) at any given moment.

[Guy de Loimbard]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

Kind of where I think things are getting blurred too. Hate speech is hard to define at a very granular level.

That said, we had an entire area up in arms due to the messaging on social media in the UK and next thing we've got riots and violence and a lot of things out of control.

I'm not sure hate speech legislation is going to change the way people think in a hurry.

It's a minefield and I'm not sure what the answer is.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

going back to punching nazi's rather than putting them in power might fucking help!

[SundogUK]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

Define 'Nazi.' There is no sensible definition of Nazi where Trump or Musk would qualify.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

"..no sensible definition"

Not a definition which a nazi would approve, you mean. But that's irrelevant: They'll never admit being nazis, no matter how many Heil Hitler- salutes they throw in public, like Musk just did.

That's one definition which is very exact. Another is pumping millions of dollars to a nazi party in another country: Very spesific definition. Which Musk also did.

Undeniable truth.

Trump is not as obvious, but he's a paid puppet anyway, hardly relevant.

[Jamie Jones]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

Well, most of the rioting associated with that particular hate speech (and a lot of it generally) was fuelled by objectively provable lies, so clamping down on that aspect would be a good start, IMHO

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

if you could give us your race and full name and address, we can give you an example.........I can guarantee you really won't like it

[Pascal Monett]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

I beg to differ.

If you advocate for violence against or the death of any specific group of people, you are using hate speech.

I can despise you and I have the right to say that (that is not, btw, the case). I cannot say that I want you hurt or dead.

Just like you can't yell "FIRE" in a theatre.

There are limits to free speech.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

I beg to differ.

If you advocate for violence against or the death of any specific group of people, you are using hate speech.

I can despise you and I have the right to say that (that is not, btw, the case). I cannot say that I want you hurt or dead.

Just like you can't yell "FIRE" in a theatre.

There are limits to free speech.

The examples you mention are incitement to violence and have been covered under existing laws for decades. That is different to the relatively new concept of hate speech. Hate is a subjective human emotion which is impossible to legislate against.

Unfortunately, your comment proves that the general masses are completely clueless about the totalitarian changes to society that are currently underway.

Take for example the proposed Irish hate speech legislation which has thankfully been dropped, for the time being.

Most strikingly for a "hate speech" bill, the legislation offers no definition of what "hate" entails, meaning even peaceful expression could fall prey to criminal prosecution. The Irish minister for justice has rejected the inclusion of any definition, saying it would hamper the ability of the prosecution to secure convictions. How is the public to know what kind of speech could be subject to prosecution? Given that "hate" is an impossible word to define in law (and is not defined in this bill), this paves the way for basically any expression considered unfavorable to be prosecuted in the future.

https://www.newsweek.com/ireland-must-say-no-orwellian-hate-speech-laws-opinion-1850546

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

As various people have stated, including Ann Widdecombe, Stephen Fry and Rowan Atkinson, you have no legal right to be protected from being offended.

The world has somehow (actually its pretty easy to know how) fostered a huge group of people who cannot cope with anything other than constant praise and adulation. And we've seen such slogans as 'words as violence' and 'silence is violence'.

Laws are now being drawn up to protect the thin of skin from words that 'might cause anxiety' (to borrow a phrase from a UK police force) otherwise they might need to go cry in a darkened room with their blankie.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: go cry in a darkened room with their blankie.

I too can only understand physical pain and don't think what goes on in your head has anything to do with your well being.

I like to imagine how everyone else is wrong and I'm one of the few true people.

I've never had anyone say anything nice to me and I turned out ok! I just think everyone else is a fucking wuss.

[SundogUK]

Re: go cry in a darkened room with their blankie.

You cannot make your well being my problem.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

> I cannot say that I want you hurt or dead.

On behalf of the grandparents I don't have. I can say that I want Nazis dead.

[SundogUK]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

Actual Nazi's? Sure. People you call Nazi because they disagree with you about something? Not so much.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

No just the ones talking about "turbo-charging" denaturalizing citizens. Promising they will deport legal immigrants because they eat cats and dogs. Declaring trans as "non-people"

Remember the Final Solution was only the final step

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

Those were not legal immigrants. And no-one has declared people with untreated mental health issues as 'non-people'. It is the left who love to dehumanise.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

" People you call Nazi because they disagree with you about something?"

That's BS and you know it. They are Nazis because they *act* and *talk* like Nazis, therefore they are Nazis. You believe modern time Nazis don't exist, do you?

Them disagreeing with me is absolutely irrelevant. Except of course on the issue of genociding people. You don't seem to mind about that either.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

"You believe modern time Nazis don't exist"

We all know they do, its called the Democrat party. You just need to look at the quantity and vitriol of the antisemitism after Oct 7th from the political left. You could tell they've been holding it in for a long time.

"Except of course on the issue of genociding people"

Mao? Stalin? Pol Pot? Genocide seems to be a very left wing thing.

[Casca]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

And another right wing AC moron

[MachDiamond]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

"Just like you can't yell "FIRE" in a theatre."

It's ok to shout "MOVIE" in a firehouse. Just note that it's a "funny one-time".

[Omnipresent]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

The problem is folks don't know right from wrong anymore, and most haven't been around long enough to be taught how fascism works to enslave a population. When you combine it with the power of misinformation, and the pervasive need by the "me" generation to be a part of group think.... It's easy to persuade, and incite a group against a target. People feel the need to be a part of something, but are not considering what that something is exactly.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

Indeed, you just need to look at the ones with the dyed hair losing their shit over something someone said and then marching in the street smashing up cars and buildings demanding that their feelings are protected from the hurty words. They strive to find a purpose to their lives by desperately following the hive mind and the latest fads to try and gain some recognition. And negative comment made about the hive mind is taken as a direct attack on them personally.

[Omnipresent]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

issue one: You have to have a sense of right and wrong. Some kind of moral compass. Blurring and obscuring the subject in circles is what russians do. It's called obfuscation. It's also what ruspublicans do.

It means to cause confusion, and then attempt to seize power in the confusion.

[Omnipresent]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

edit: That pervasive putrid fog of confusion, and the WTF just happened afterwards is also called "hamburderers' revenge."

[Jamie Jones]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

Weak post.

The SJW's you're referring to are indeed often an embarrassing fringe of the left, but their huffing doesn't involve smashing up cars and buildings.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

Yes, yes it does. Buildings were damaged during pro-palestine protests at many universities and in other places.

https://www.montrealgazette.com/news/article567322.html

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/02/palestine-israel-manchester-university-activists-weizmann/

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/08/us/oct-7-pro-palestinian-protests-vandalism.html

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/pro-palestine-protesters-smash-windows-at-columbia-university/vi-AA1nX6W5

And then there is the summer of love... oh boy! didn't some kids get gunned down by the BLM protesters?

[Jamie Jones]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

.The original post I was replying to said:

" dyed hair losing their shit over something someone said and then marching in the street smashing up cars and buildings demanding that their feelings are protected from the hurty words. "

Neither the people protesting the Palestine genocide or the murder of black men were protesting against "hurty words", and whilst I don't condone the violence, smashing windows because you were being expelled for protesting against a genocide isn't the same as actively targeting and attacking people.

The Uk riots and Jan 6th were fuelled by pure hatred.

Ax for BLM murders, they are largely *of* BLM protestors by right wing "patriots". That incel Rittenhouse blimp managed to get away with murdering 2.

https://acleddata.com/2020/09/03/demonstrations-political-violence-in-america-new-data-for-summer-2020/

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

The Kenosha Kid was defending himself from rioters. None of the people he shot were BLM protesters, they were just out there to smash and burn.

There is no other case of a 'BLM' protester being 'murdered'.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53224445

https://www.yahoo.com/news/blm-rioter-found-guilty-murdering-123728631.html

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/09/04/portland-protest-shooting-suspect-dead-aaron-jay-danielson/5713769002/

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12424596/driver-kicked-unconcious-portland-blm-protesters/

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Buildings were damaged

See! And the Palestinians (and dyed hair wierdos) are moaning because children keep getting shot by snipers?

Get some fucking perspective, some buildings at some universities were DAMAGED!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Buildings were damaged

Well if we are going to minimise protests like that then Jan 6th was nothing as all they did was break a couple of windows and leave some empty water bottles on the floor. A bit of damage is nothing.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Buildings were damaged

" all they did was break a couple of window"

... and killed several polices. But they don't matter, when they are on the Wrong Side(TM)?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Buildings were damaged

" and killed several polices"

Actually that number is ZERO. The only people who died on the day were protesters, some murdered by the police.

[DoctorPaul]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

I'm old enough to remember the Kent State massacre.

Fleeing students shot in the back by the National Guard as I recall, check out Ohio by Neil Young for some background.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

To quote the political left when anyone on the right mentions Ashley Babbit: "if they'd just done what they were told!".

The protesters were throwing rocks and other projectiles at the NG. This does not justify shooting back at them but you could say they knew they were provoking people who had guns.

[SundogUK]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

Tell that to Antifa.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

Someone blowing a dog whistle? Down! Good dog!

[MachDiamond]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

"but their huffing doesn't involve smashing up cars and buildings."

The people of Portland, OR and Seattle, WA might disagree.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: look at the ones with the dyed hair losing their shit

every accusation.....

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

"Indeed, you just need to look at the ones with the dyed hair losing their shit over something someone said and then marching in the street smashing up cars and buildings demanding that their feelings are protected from the hurty words."

Strawman argument: Any marching of the street is enough. And because of that it's OK for Police to butcher them on the street, right?

Because that's the attitude here.

"They strive to find a purpose to their lives by desperately following the hive mind and the latest fads to try and gain some recognition."

Just like the Trump-cultists. Very poor argument.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hate speech - a truly Orwellian concept

"What exactly is hate speech and who gets to define it?"

Well ... demanding that group x should be "eliminated", i.e. genocided, doesn't leave any ambiguity, doesn't it? Even if it's not literally worded that way: The idea is the hate speech and words to express it are not really important.

Typically words are defined in a dictionary .... but I admit that this definition is a border case, sometimes. Example above is not.

Nazis are of course an exception: Hating nazis is allowed.

Referring to Orwell is poor try: The nazis, like Musk, use every trick in the book trying to explain proper nazi -salutes away and that is proper Newspeak(tm) for you.

[Zippy´s Sausage Factory]

X said the not-for-profit campaign group's research only followed major brands and racist trolls in an effort to stack the deck for its purposes.

What, they're supposed to only follow tiny brands that only advertise next to people who only post kitten pics? The point isn't whether they went looking for it or not, the point is that they found it.

[Pascal Monett]

"platforms should respond in 1 day"

Looks like Musk is going to have to re-hire some moderators.

Is he going to have the time, given his new responsibilities in the US Government ?

[Andy Non]

Re: "platforms should respond in 1 day"

"...Participants must commit to review at least two-thirds of hate speech notices received from monitoring reporters within 24 hours or to make their "best effort" to do so."

Musk "We are doing our best, our moderator needs to take a couple of days off a week you know."

[Dan 55]

Re: "platforms should respond in 1 day"

They can have a reply in a minute if Leon tells his crack squad of H1B programming surfs to set up a script to auto reply with a turd emoji. Probably not what the DSA wants though.

[Blackjack]

Like it or not an important part of the population gets their news on social media so if TV, Radio, Newspapers and so on are regulated why not social media?

[Anonymous Coward]

Social media is not a publisher. Also a court ruled that Rachel Madow is opinion and doesn't need to abide by rules regarding facts or truth.

[Dan 55]

Obviously not any court which has any jurisdiction anywhere in the civilised world.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Social media is not a publisher"

It *wasn't* a publisher. When Musk decided to make Twitter his personal propaganda channel it changed to publisher.

Meta and Tik tok are in the same class, now.

[John Brown (no body)]

You could also argue that "the algorithm" that directs posts to you is "publishing" too. If it was only ever people you followed and/or post you search for, then that's not publishing. Once the "service" starts directing stuff at you and it's tuned to send "controversial"[*] stuff, then IMHO that IS publishing.

* Whether manually adjusted or "learned behaviour", the "algorithm" knows to send you more and more extreme stuff because it has "learned" that that creates the most "engagement" and therefore the most clicks and ad views.

[[e-mail]]

"When Musk decided to make Twitter his personal propaganda channel..."

When people you support ban things, it is justified.

When Musk gives free reign to the lunatics so everyone can see them making fools of themselves, he is a nazi. Even though he hasn't issued edicts banning people from talking about things like the validity of the Covid lockdowns, the contents of Hunter Biden's laptop, whether Donald Trump is a fit President and even whether he is a nazi, you say he is a bad man and using X as his personal propaganda channel.

Compare and contrast that with the way social media behaved under the last Administration and tell me who did more to stifle free speech.

[ChrisElvidge]

Algorithms

Isn't it the algorithms that govern and/or recommend what people see that are causing the problems?

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Algorithms

Yes but if the algorithm is function(what_the_boss_wants, what_the_advertisers_want) then you can't really blame "the algorithm"

[NerryTutkins]

When I look at Facebook now, my feed isn't posts by my family members and distant friends.

All I get is post after post from people I don't know, that FB is showing me. And these are either

(a) "Glory to Russia" posts, showing the Kremlin or some pic of Russia with sentiments of "Russia, the best country in the world" or

(b) Sites claiming to be "Historic Britain" or "Past Glory" showing old, or AI generated pics of London or other UK cities, full of white people. Looking at the transparency info, which FB tries to make hard to get to, these sites all originated as innocuous sites several years back, often in completely different countries, which have at some point been changed to their current incarnation. Judging by the volume of Reformtards posting, the purpose seems to be to elicit racist commentary on how much better the UK was before Sadiq Khan let all the dark people in and took over.

It doesn't matter how many times you click "not interested" and "stop showing me this shit", Zuck's shit cannon just keeps sending the crap, relentlessly.

Is Zuck an agent for Putin, or are FB engineers just a total bunch of asshats who can't figure out how to actually give decent recommendations?

Is it really so hard to create a social network where I can choose just to see posts from my family and friends, without having the billionaire owner's shit cannot hosing me down every time I login?

[Anonymous Coward]

You look at your feed? I keep my account so old friends can contact me if desired (I'll see the FB email), but otherwise I don't visit the site. (And I use an ad blocker which stops the FB buttons on other sites.)

Every time I see one of the "Why I am on Facebook" ads, my brain autotranslates it to "Why am I on Facebook?" and can't provide a good reason aside from the above.

[DoctorPaul]

Check out fbpurity.com, their plugin does a damn fine job of cleaning out the crap on FB. Now I just see posts from friends or groups that I follow.

[Anonymous Coward]

fbpurity, that's going to become an ironic name soon.

[MachDiamond]

"Check out fbpurity.com, their plugin does a damn fine job of cleaning out the crap on FB."

If you have to run third party moderation/filtering software to make FB tolerable, how is that effort worth it?

I've got more painting to get done before sunset as the weather won't be very good for the next several days if They aren't lying to me as well.

[Winkypop]

Chamberlain 2.0

It’s OK guys, they (Meta, X, etc) promised to play nice.

Everything is fine.

[Anonymous Coward]

I assume this will also apply to anyone who maligns people who voted FOR Brexit?

Yeah, of course it will Remain supporters still think everything is rosy on the Mainland, despite what is happening in France and Germany right now...