[Chapter-delegates] [Internet Policy] Mark Zuckerberg accused of abusing power after Facebook deletes 'napalm girl' post

[Joly MacFie]

​Good quote, fwded by Dewayne Hendricks, from Kevin Kelly,

Social media is less than 2,000 days old. It is unclear to date whether or
not overfitting a filter optimizes commercial profits, or whether or not
consumers want to optimize relevance. We simply don’t know yet. But we do
know that if a service tends not to produce what consumers ultimately want,
they will leave and use a different service. So it is very much in the
commercial interests of social media to provide its customers with the
attention tools they need. Since neither side yet know what those tools
are, this will be an ongoing development.

https://medium.com/the-mission/the-technological-trends-that-will-shape-the-next-30-years-c13c8b069094
​

On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 11:47 PM, Carlos Vera <cveraq at gmail.com> wrote:

> They usually, like any other company that face a legal demand or legal
> warning about a possible legal violation, ‎act removing any content and
> then the removed user has to claim for their right nor Facebook.
>
> The kind of legal warning usually comes from big companies, governments or
> organizations "hard to fight"‎ for normal users.
>
> Carlos Vera
> Isoc Ecuador
>
> Enviado desde mi smartphone BlackBerry 10.
>   Mensaje original
> De: John Levine
> Enviado: sábado, 10 de septiembre de 2016 20:43
> Para: chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> CC: g+isoc at cobb.uk.net
> Asunto: Re: [Chapter-delegates] [Internet Policy] Mark Zuckerberg accused
> of abusing power after Facebook deletes 'napalm girl' post
>
> >My personal view is that FB should recognise "press" and apply no
> >controls at all to their postings. Neither editorial policy, nor taste
> >or even legal (unless required to remove something after the fact by a
> >specific court order). In return, FB should be guaranteed that it can
> >claim "common carrier" type protection from criminal or civil
> >proceedings derived from these press postings.
>
> Welcome to today's Internet. It would take about 15 minutes for this
> to be gamed by spammers and scammers. It's really really hard to
> separate worthwhile content from junk, and anyone who hasn't done it
> tends to underestimate the difficulty by orders of magnitude.
>
> I'm not saying that Facebook is perfect or that there aren't concerns
> about how they select the stuff they show their users, but I can
> guarantee you that any simple solution won't work. As others have
> noted, it's hard to pick the one famous news picture out of a stream
> of casual nude porn. It's particularly hard when the picture is of
> a child, since online child abuse material, the legal term for child
> pornography, is a large and continuing issue. The news picture clearly
> is not pornographic in any way, but it's again really hard to write
> filters that understand when to make exceptions.
>
> In the US we have a law known as the CDA or 47 US 230 (the section of
> the US Code where it's codified) that gives online providers broad
> immunity against liability for material created by other parties.
> It's not "common carrier" but it's pretty close, so I can also assure
> you that's not what Facebook is worried about.
>
> R's,
> John
>
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>



-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
--------------------------------------------------------------
-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20160911/6a46d540/attachment.htm>