Revealed: Mark Zuckerberg Wants to ‘Trade’ Free Speech for ‘Safety’ And ‘Having an Informed Community’

Source: Breitbart
Published: Mar 22, 2018
Author: Allum Bokhari
Post Date: 2018-03-24 11:44:37 by Deckard
Views: 1662

In an interview with Wired magazine, Mark Zuckerberg revealed Facebook’s political agenda — he wants to curb free speech and free expression on the platform in exchange for “safety.”

From the Wired interview:

I think at the heart of a lot of these issues we face are tradeoffs between real values that people care about. You know, when you think about issues like fake news or hate speech, right, it’s a tradeoff between free speech and free expression and safety and having an informed community. These are all the challenging situations that I think we are working to try to navigate as best we can. (Emphasis added)

Zuckerberg’s “trade-off” confirms Facebook’s long-suspected agenda: to take the platform away from first amendment principles, towards a European understanding of speech, in which elites determine what ordinary people can and cannot say, based on vague, flexible terms like “hate speech” and “fake news.”

Similarly to YouTube’s lurch towards censoriousness, this is a massive bait-and-switch. Silicon Valley promised users open platforms where they would be able to air their views on an equal playing field, without interference from corporate media, political elites, and gatekeepers.

Now Zuckerberg wants to install himself as the ultimate gatekeeper, presiding over the speech and expression of the platform’s 2 billion users. In order to ensure “safety” and an “informed community,” he is going to decide what information is allowed to spread on the platform, and what information is going to be suppressed.

We are already seeing the results of this approach. Facebook’s recent changes to users’ newsfeeds have caused engagement on conservative media and on President Trump’s page to plummet, while left-wing and corporate media has received a boost.

By taking on an editorial role, Facebook may be violating the justification for Communication Decency Act’s safe harbor provision, which grants online platforms legal immunity from content posted by their users.

Facebook’s decision to take a top-down, editorial view on the information shared on its platform was recently confirmed by the company’s head of news partnership’s Campbell Brown. Speaking at Recode’s annual conference, Brown said:

This is not us stepping back from news. This is us changing our relationship with publishers and emphasizing something that Facebook has never done before: It’s having a point of view, and it’s leaning into quality news. … We are, for the first time in the history of Facebook, taking a step to try to to define what ‘quality news’ looks like and give that a boost. (Emphasis added)

At a Senate hearing in January, Sen. Ted Cruz called out representatives from Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter over censorship of conservatives. Cruz told the representatives that if their platforms did not remain politically neutral, they could lose legal immunity for user content under the provisions of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Without this protection, social media companies would be legally liable for all content posted on their platforms – an existential threat to their business model.

Post Comment   Private Reply

#1: Willie Green    To: Deckard (#0)

At a Senate hearing in January, Sen. Ted Cruz called out representatives from Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter over...

Blah blah blah...

If there be a just God in this world, he'd stike Ted Cruz mute...

And Rand Paul too...

Willie Green posted on 2018-03-24 12:33:03   Reply   Private Reply


#2: Liberator    To: Willie Green (#1)

Blah blah blah...

Well stated, Willie.

(See that little cup, pills, and glass of water?....)

Liberator posted on 2018-03-24 12:46:46   Reply   Private Reply


#3: rlk    To: Deckard (#0)

Mark Zuckerberg Wants to ‘Trade’ Free Speech for ‘Safety’ And ‘Having an Informed Community’

Yup, Big Brother Zuckerberg and pals are going to be watching over you.

We are living in an imposed conformist society where anyone with a functioning IQ of over 95 is a threat to 'safety'.

rlk posted on 2018-03-24 12:50:14   Reply   Private Reply


#4: Liberator    To: rlk (#3)

We are living in an imposed conformist society where anyone with a functioning IQ of over 95 is a threat to 'safety'.

True, we DO now live in a "conformist society", but Orwell predicted all this in '1984'.

Mass and Social Media has been the biggest facilitator of this brainwashing. And btw, the standard "IQ" test has little to do the Common Sense Quotient.

Liberator posted on 2018-03-24 13:01:32   Reply   Private Reply


#5: Justified    To: Deckard (#0)

No one can touch the hate speech of the left. The left is the least informed group in the world. I bet some tribe in Afrika with no tv, internet or electricity is better informed than the left in America!

Justified posted on 2018-03-24 16:45:55   Reply   Private Reply


#6: A K A Stone    To: Willie Green (#1)

If you don't repent for voting for infanticide God is going to throw you in the lake of fire. I want you to repent. If not I'm gonna ask God if I can use your burning soul to heat my room.

A K A Stone posted on 2018-03-24 19:01:33   Reply   Private Reply


#7: Willie Green    To: A K A Stone (#6)

God is going to throw you in the lake of fire.

Willie Green posted on 2018-03-24 19:37:48   Reply   Private Reply


#8: rlk    To: Liberator (#4)

And btw, the standard "IQ" test has little to do the Common Sense Quotient.

What information a test constructor makes a test look for and defines as intelligence is determined by his personal biases and views of what should be important.

rlk posted on 2018-03-24 20:41:46   Reply   Private Reply


#9: sneakypete    To: Deckard (#0)

Is this really a surprise to anyone?

sneakypete posted on 2018-03-25 08:11:02   Reply   Private Reply


#10: Liberator    To: rlk (#8)

...a test constructor makes a test look for and defines as intelligence is determined by his personal biases and views of what should be important.

Rhetorically speaking, aren't "personal biases and views" of the Tester/Test relative, arguably skewing the standard "Intelligence" test?

I'd submit that the standard IQ Test overlooks and dismisses "Common Sense" intelligence.

Liberator posted on 2018-03-25 12:34:36   Reply   Private Reply


#11: Liberator    To: Willie Green, A K A Stone (#7)

Are there trannies down there?

Then that might be "hell."

Liberator posted on 2018-03-25 12:36:42   Reply   Private Reply


#12: Liberator    To: Justified (#5)

No one can touch the hate speech of the left. The left is the least informed group in the world.

Yup, they are fueled by hate; Conditioned to hate everyone who disagrees with them and everything they don't understand. It's the most successful "Pavlov's Dog" experiment in human history. And not by coercion (although these days Public Schools ARE engaging in it.)

The entire West is swept up in their suicidal tsunami. Only Common Sense conservatives and Christians are holding Western Civ together.

I can't decide whether the Left's soldiers want to be Kamikazes or Zombies.

Liberator posted on 2018-03-25 12:55:26   Reply   Private Reply


#13: rlk    To: Liberator (#10)

I'd submit that the standard IQ Test overlooks and dismisses "Common Sense" intelligence.

To a great extent this is true. Many such tests were developed by academics to measure probable success an academia or having succeded in academia. Academics are noted for feats of memory and being able to string pompous piles of words together in an unreal world. "Common sense" tests are more difficult to construct and become politically objectionable.

Asking for an analysis of the relationship between Aristotles A, E, I, and O, propositions might be relative to real life, but it won't be found on IQ exams.

rlk posted on 2018-03-25 20:55:17   Reply   Private Reply