From CNN:
Facebook announced Thursday afternoon that it had designated some high-profile people, including Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who’s notorious for using anti-Semitic language, and right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, as “dangerous” and said it will be purging them from its platforms.
Jones and his media outlet InfoWars had previously been banned from Facebook in August 2018, but had maintained a presence on Instagram, which is owned by Facebook. On Thursday, Jones and InfoWars will be barred from Instagram as well.
Other people banned on Thursday included Paul Nehlen, an anti-Semite who unsuccessfully ran for Congress in 2016 and 2018, and fringe right-wing media personalities Laura Loomer, Milo Yiannopoulos and Paul Joseph Watson.
“We’ve always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology,” a Facebook spokesperson said in a statement provided to CNN Business. “The process for evaluating potential violators is extensive and it is what led us to our decision to remove these accounts today.”
Link to the rest at CNN
“Whoever controls the media controls the mind.” – Jim Morrison
There are alternatives to Facebook that are not yet as big. MeWe is one that is growing, mostly as a conservative alternative. At this stage, they are like the early wild west days of Facebook or MySpace.
The best alternative is “none of the above”.
Failing that, diversification.
If everything is to be tribalized then by jove tribalize everything! 😉
Especially gossip.
Who has more power to sway elections? The Russians or those that truly control social media? More deplatforming is coming.
The bans themselves aren’t surprising, though they are infuriating. What is surprising and in my opinion more horrifying, was the edict that stated anyone talking about the banned persons or sharing news from their sites or what have you that wasn’t derogatory in nature would face the deletion of that post as a first offense and a permanent ban as a second.
It isn’t enough that they instituted the bans – which are all about getting ready to silence any influencer who might sway the 2020 elections, never doubt it – but they’re so intimidated by the voices they’re attempting to silence, they can’t risk letting the “unwashed masses” speak openly of their ideas.
And yes, Farrakhan was absolutely a token red herring. He’s a despicable human being and his rhetoric verges on calling for violence – his or whoever runs his social media accounts. Given his age, it likely isn’t him. So his banning is to my mind the strongest as far as being reasonable. The rest? Please.
If they were serious about getting rid of people who were dangerous, there’d be a list of a hundred other names to hit before the ones they did. They’re not interested in stopping true “hate speech,” but in silencing opposition to their political ideas, period. Talk about election interference.
It’s always hate speech when you don’t agree with it.
It’s ‘only’ considered hate speech when you don’t agree with it.
(Things you/they agree with obviously can’t be hate speech because you/they don’t hate the speech. 😉 )
The worst of these guys is probably Farrakhan, and he’s been around for forever, 40+ years. I’m sorry I can’t get behind this notion that he’s now dangerous enough to silence. He’s gotta be close to 90 years old.
Did one of these mass shooter guys cite Farrakhan or Alex Jones or something? Terrorists cite Islam but we don’t ban Islam. There was a time when rap and metal music were blamed for violence. Then it was Doom the video game.
Meh. I’m sure this sort of thing will continue, and I’ll continue to roll my eyes at it.
I thought banning Farrakhan was the equivalent of an “easy A” — if they ban him, Facebook has cover for banning right-leaning people, which they reportedly do over and over again, for less reason. This way Facebook can say they ban “both sides.” As you say, he’s old, and therefore not the New Hotness. If Facebook banned Rashida Tlaib or Ilhan Omar and others of their ilk, that would be a true man-bites-dog of a story. As it is, eye-rolling as a policy has a lot going for it 🙂
Lol. Now who’s pushing conspiracies!? 😉
It sounds possible though doesn’t it? Ban this one lefty jack wagon, way past relevancy, as cover to ban a whole slew of righties.
Ugh. Partisanship. I avoid it as much as possible. I don’t even comment on TPV much any more in order to avoid it.
I never thought I’d turn into a head in the sand type, who does as much as he can to ignore the goings on of the cultural/political dramarama. But here I am, fingers in the ears doing my best to ignore it (most days anyway).
They can’t ban the anti-semites in congress because they have real world power and can retaliate. Farrakhan and the others aren’t sitting in Congress. It’s more about power rather than partisanship.
“Some animals are more equal.”