Facebook puts block on Bolsonaro allies

[Eldorado]

"Facebook said on Saturday it has put a global block on certain accounts controlled by supporters of Brazil's President Jair Bolsonaro implicated in a fake news inquiry, a day after it was fined for not complying with a Supreme Court judge's order to do so.

"A spokesperson for Facebook said the order was "extreme" and threatens "freedom of expression outside of Brazil's jurisdiction", but said the company has agreed to the order.

"Given the threat of criminal liability to a local employee, at this point we see no other alternative than complying with the decision by blocking the accounts globally, while we appeal to the Supreme Court," the spokesperson said."

Full report at US News: https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2020-08-01/facebook-puts-global-block-on-brazils-bolsonaro-supporters

[Piney]

I say "good", after his treatment of indigenous peoples and the Amazon itself.

[godnodog]

good, the man is a direct competitor with Trump, but the advantage goes to Bolsonaro as he "follows" Trump, yet Trumps says more unbelievable stuff.

[+and-then]

Every time they block a user for political reasons, they make a stronger case for being treated as publishers.  Their hate is going to bring them down and the sooner the better.

[Gwynbleidd]

19 hours ago, Eldorado said:

"Facebook said on Saturday it has put a global block on certain accounts controlled by supporters of Brazil's President Jair Bolsonaro implicated in a fake news inquiry, a day after it was fined for not complying with a Supreme Court judge's order to do so.

"A spokesperson for Facebook said the order was "extreme" and threatens "freedom of expression outside of Brazil's jurisdiction", but said the company has agreed to the order.

"Given the threat of criminal liability to a local employee, at this point we see no other alternative than complying with the decision by blocking the accounts globally, while we appeal to the Supreme Court," the spokesperson said."

Full report at US News: https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2020-08-01/facebook-puts-global-block-on-brazils-bolsonaro-supporters

I'm not talking about this case in particular, but I am definitely not a fan of these tech giants taking it upon themselves to enforce the public to stick to whatever the MSM's current narrative is.  If you don't, then you're out.  So much for free speech. 

Quote

The accounts were blocked due to allegations that they violated laws on hate speech.

Hate Speech or Hate Facts  LOL

I'm sure people could take this a million different ways. 

[Grim Reaper 6]

10 hours ago, and then said:

Every time they block a user for political reasons, they make a stronger case for being treated as publishers.  Their hate is going to bring them down and the sooner the better.

You can p*** and moan all you want, the Supreme Court has made a decision and they have the right to block any user for whatever they choose to. I think as much as you all cry about this subject you should just open your own site, you could call it the Radical Whiners of Right!!!

[Myles]

1 hour ago, Manwon Lender said:

You can p*** and moan all you want, the Supreme Court has made a decision and they have the right to block any user for whatever they choose to. I think as much as you all cry about this subject you should just open your own site, you could call it the Radical Whiners of Right!!!

Don't you agree that it is not a good thing when a company like Facebook only allows you to see what they think you should see?   

This case isn't a big deal for me, but if they would continue to censor posts of one political side, it could be bad.  

[Gromdor]

7 hours ago, Myles said:

Don't you agree that it is not a good thing when a company like Facebook only allows you to see what they think you should see?   

This case isn't a big deal for me, but if they would continue to censor posts of one political side, it could be bad.  

Well supposedly we are to trust this "Free Market Capitalism" thing and consumers are supposed to use the power of their purchases to correct things like this by taking their business elsewhere  so we don't have to rely on government regulation.

[travelnjones]

Just as a general statement

You + Social Media < You

[Grim Reaper 6]

10 hours ago, Myles said:

Don't you agree that it is not a good thing when a company like Facebook only allows you to see what they think you should see?   

This case isn't a big deal for me, but if they would continue to censor posts of one political side, it could be bad.  

I understand what you are saying, but in reality Facebook is a private entity and ever person who signs up agrees to a large number of rules they agree to comply with. Unfortunately most people do not read those rules, they just hit the I agree button so they can get signed in. While I do agree that it would be best to treat both Political Parties equally, what I think and what you think doesn't matter. First they can do what they see fit to do, whether we feel it's fair or not. When Facebook was formed it was designed to be a platform for individuals to use to stay in touch with friends, I do understand that has changed and that now politics is playing a big part in the over all use of the forum.

However, the one thing that overrides any push back to Facebooks policies is that the Supreme Court has already made a ruling  about cases like this and their view is that Facebook can choose to do what they are doing. So with that said there is no higher rule of law that can override their decision in this matter, so what good does all this controversy do.

My question to you is with the Supreme Courts decision what do you suggest we should to change it?

Please answer my question, I answered your respectfully.

[Gwynbleidd]

11 hours ago, Myles said:

This case isn't a big deal for me, but if they would continue to censor posts of one political side, it could be bad.  

Yup I totally agree Myles.  I honestly miss the days when people kept politics to themselves and it was more of a personal topic, much like Religion.  

People may argue that it's great that we've progressed to actually talk about politics amongst each other.  Tell me, how many people do you ever see simply talking about politics nowadays?  Very, very few.  It's all argue, insult, attack, you're a racist, rinse and repeat.   We're currently living in a world that's in a whole lotta hurt.

The Tech Giants and MSM wield their politics left and right as if it's a weapon used upon the public, then the public go out to fight this war the media has created, for them.  If people don't realise this, they can go back to sleep.

[Myles]

13 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

I understand what you are saying, but in reality Facebook is a private entity and ever person who signs up agrees to a large number of rules they agree to comply with. Unfortunately most people do not read those rules, they just hit the I agree button so they can get signed in. While I do agree that it would be best to treat both Political Parties equally, what I think and what you think doesn't matter. First they can do what they see fit to do, whether we feel it's fair or not. When Facebook was formed it was designed to be a platform for individuals to use to stay in touch with friends, I do understand that has changed and that now politics is playing a big part in the over all use of the forum.

However, the one thing that overrides any push back to Facebooks policies is that the Supreme Court has already made a ruling  about cases like this and their view is that Facebook can choose to do what they are doing. So with that said there is no higher rule of law that can override their decision in this matter, so what good does all this controversy do.

My question to you is with the Supreme Courts decision what do you suggest we should to change it?

 

I'm not sure what should be done.  While being a private company gives Facebook certain rights, I think when it is a big part of so many people's lives the rules can change.  Similar to monopolies.   If I'm the only one providing something to my local community for a high price, all is good.  If I'm the only one providing an essential service nationwide for a high price the government can intervene.  

[Grim Reaper 6]

24 minutes ago, Myles said:

I'm not sure what should be done.  While being a private company gives Facebook certain rights, I think when it is a big part of so many people's lives the rules can change.  Similar to monopolies.   If I'm the only one providing something to my local community for a high price, all is good.  If I'm the only one providing an essential service nationwide for a high price the government can intervene.  

You keep over looking the Supreme Court decision that says they are within their rights to do what they are doing, with that said what can the Government do. There is no higher rule of law than the Supreme Court so the Government can not intervene. The only thing that can change Facebooks current polices is a change in the direction that they are currently taking, so basically the changes must come from within.

[Golden Duck]

On 8/3/2020 at 12:11 AM, Eldorado said:

"Facebook said on Saturday it has put a global block on certain accounts controlled by supporters of Brazil's President Jair Bolsonaro implicated in a fake news inquiry, a day after it was fined for not complying with a Supreme Court judge's order to do so.

"A spokesperson for Facebook said the order was "extreme" and threatens "freedom of expression outside of Brazil's jurisdiction", but said the company has agreed to the order.

"Given the threat of criminal liability to a local employee, at this point we see no other alternative than complying with the decision by blocking the accounts globally, while we appeal to the Supreme Court," the spokesperson said."

Full report at US News: https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2020-08-01/facebook-puts-global-block-on-brazils-bolsonaro-supporters

Quote

...

Justice Alexandre de Moraes had ruled on Thursday that Facebook and Twitter failed to comply with orders to block the accounts because they were only blocked within Brazil, but remained accessible with foreign IP addresses.

...

I'm confused why FB are the haters