Mark Zuckerberg accused of abusing power after row over 'napalm girl' photo(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
Mark Zuckerberg accused of abusing power after row over 'napalm girl' photo
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/sep/08/facebook-mark-zuckerberg-napalm-girl-photo-vietnam-war
8 comments
He is right. Applying "terms of agreement" blindly is stupid. For the same principle, one couldn't post a pic of David Michelangelo or Birth of Venus, because of nudity?
Norms and laws have to be applied thinking about their Ratio, not just "because here it says so"
Norms and laws have to be applied thinking about their Ratio, not just "because here it says so"
Actually Facebook's terms, at least for their Instagram property, allow for photographs of murals, paintings and ironically other photographs depicting nudity.
So I see the point you were going for but its almost like they made that policy out of precognition for your exact rebuttal years in the future
So I see the point you were going for but its almost like they made that policy out of precognition for your exact rebuttal years in the future
So basically he's saying "I broke the terms of agreement and you removed my content. Now I'm sad." I don't know why some journalists seem to believe that terms and/or laws don't apply to them. I know there are a lot of gray areas, but you still don't have the right to do anything you please and yell at the world for not being handled differently from whatever law/agreement you know you are breaking.
No, to use your terms, he addresses that the current terms of agreement are incorrect and don't fit the media role the medium (Facebook) has and should be addressed. Facebook is a huge news outlet, or at least used by many people in that way, and therefore should consider a more fitting approach to such (news) articles.
Even though businesses are privately owned, when they provide public spaces, they do not absolutely get to make up their own rules on grounds of private proprietorship.
Suppose Facebook's agreement said "blacks are not allowed in this site and will be removed". Would that even be legal in the US?
Suppose Facebook's agreement said "blacks are not allowed in this site and will be removed". Would that even be legal in the US?
> Suppose Facebook's agreement said "blacks are not allowed in this site and will be removed". Would that even be legal in the US?
I would imagine it would be. I don't really frequent any racially-charged Web sites, but if KKK or Aryan Nations or you-name-it run a forum of some sort, those are likely the rules they go by.
I would imagine it would be. I don't really frequent any racially-charged Web sites, but if KKK or Aryan Nations or you-name-it run a forum of some sort, those are likely the rules they go by.
> you still don't have the right to do anything you please and yell at the world for not being handled differently from whatever law/agreement you know you are breaking.
actually, you do have the right to face the consequences and complain about them and try to be influential enough to change the consequences
which is exactly what is going on here.
Facebook cannot distinguish between pornography and nudity, while United State federal and state law can distinguish, even when children are involved, despite what hollywood might have you confused about.
actually, you do have the right to face the consequences and complain about them and try to be influential enough to change the consequences
which is exactly what is going on here.
Facebook cannot distinguish between pornography and nudity, while United State federal and state law can distinguish, even when children are involved, despite what hollywood might have you confused about.
No. He is saying the agreement is either stupid or stupidly executed and this proves it.
[deleted]
Large Norwegian Newspaper (Aftenposten) changed its logo for today, and has this open letter, strong message.
http://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/kommentar/Dear-Mark-I-am-...
sorry for bad formatting, new to this one
Nudity == bad. Jihadists == Freedom of speech.
FB "the world’s most important medium." Ha! If this is true then I'm really out of touch.
Can you think of any other single medium that’s so universal?
It has a billion active users per day. No other medium in the world comes even close.
Where medium == single company. Not TV or internet or newspapers in general.
Where medium == single company. Not TV or internet or newspapers in general.
In other news, Newspaper requests different rights for “editors and other Facebook users” as a way to stop 'limiting of freedoms'.
tl;dr Editor breaks TOS, uses open letter to misuse own editorial responsibility.
tl;dr Editor breaks TOS, uses open letter to misuse own editorial responsibility.
This photo shows the atrocity of using napalm. The suffering of this girl (any idea in how much pain she is?) is much more important than the hurt feelings of some people about 'showing too much skin'.
The OP makes the point that the TOS must be changed. This photo was chosen Press Photo of the Year and earned a Pulitzer Price. It also influenced public opinion worldwide.
Some things are bigger than hurt feelings.
The OP makes the point that the TOS must be changed. This photo was chosen Press Photo of the Year and earned a Pulitzer Price. It also influenced public opinion worldwide.
Some things are bigger than hurt feelings.
Her name is Phan Thị Kim Phúc, and her Wikipedia article has a bit of information about her current health: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phan_Thi_Kim_Phuc
I doubt Facebook removed the picture because of hurt feelings though. I'd wager it's more that they have a "nudity is not allowed" policy, and they apply that policy without thinking for even one second. In other words: Zero tolerance.
I doubt Facebook removed the picture because of hurt feelings though. I'd wager it's more that they have a "nudity is not allowed" policy, and they apply that policy without thinking for even one second. In other words: Zero tolerance.
My comment only highlights the Newspaper requesting different editorial rights on Facebook between editors and users, while at the same time defending editorial freedoms – I have no opinion on Facebook's TOS, or what influences public opinion.
I do agree, however, that some things are bigger than hurt feelings.
I do agree, however, that some things are bigger than hurt feelings.
I don't get it. Why does a Norwegian paper complain about an American company? Facebook isn't Altenposten's website, you post something on Facebook, you play by Facebook's rules. You don't agree, then don't post on Facebook and go run your own website / printed paper.
And if you feel that Facebook is too large and censoring things, go talk to your government. If you are a large enough paper in your country, you should have a say.
I think the biggest issue here is that there is no way to get into a reasonable discussion with Facebook that a picture should not be removed or pixelated. It's automated, and no Facebook representative will look at it.
It should be very easy for Facebook to include a picture like this in their whitelist (eg. all award winning photos or something).
And if you feel that Facebook is too large and censoring things, go talk to your government. If you are a large enough paper in your country, you should have a say.
I think the biggest issue here is that there is no way to get into a reasonable discussion with Facebook that a picture should not be removed or pixelated. It's automated, and no Facebook representative will look at it.
It should be very easy for Facebook to include a picture like this in their whitelist (eg. all award winning photos or something).
> You don't agree, then don't post on Facebook and go run your own website / printed paper.
Except that Facebook essentially has a monopoly on information. Is there any other platform that’s so omnipresent and frequently used?
Except that Facebook essentially has a monopoly on information. Is there any other platform that’s so omnipresent and frequently used?
This American company evades taxes from Norway (and all other countries they operate), so maybe they have even more reasons to complain than their American counter-part. Same problem is happening here in Brazil.
[deleted]
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12457004 (10 hours ago, 165 comments)