Facebook | Forum « Facebook and Freedom of Speech

Facebook and Freedom of Speech (6 posts)

Topic tags: Facebook, standards of use

Kim Kline said
9 months, 4 weeks ago:
Facebook pages have popped up recently in support of the Aurora, CO gunman. A statement from Facebook says the site does not violate its conditions, but will be monitored. To me, there really is not “freedom of speech” issue since Facebook is free to set its own posting guidelines as a private business. What do you think?
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/25/tech/social-media/facebook-shooter-fan-page/index.html
@kimkline | # | Top
Kristy C. Cartier said
9 months, 4 weeks ago:
@kimkline It is doubtful that there can truly be free speech in a litigious and “bottom-line” society. While the sites are distasteful, I am glad to see that Facebook is allowing them. Maybe if some of these angry feeling weren’t suppressed, there’d be less violence (one can hop anyway!). Love to hear what others have to say.
@kc_kreative | # | Top
Ken Mcclary said
9 months, 4 weeks ago:
I do not support the page but I do support the right to publish a page. Sure Facebook can police the subject matter if it is going to cause physical harm to people but other then that words that are in bad taste can be ignored. If you do not want to see it you do not have to. I respect that Facebook would stand behind the idea of free thinking and free speech even if I feel…along with many others I’m sure…that pages like this are in bad taste.
What if people started to be offended by social networking. Clearly this in not anything close to the same subject matter, but would it be ok for someone to dictate what you publish just because they think it is offensive? This is a matter of taste vs right and I do not feel it is Facebook’s job to police pages like this if they are not a real physical threat to people.
My 2 Cent…Great topic @kimkline
@ken-mcclary | # | Top
Kim Kline said
9 months, 4 weeks ago:
@kc_kreative Thanks Kristy. I too am okay with Facebook leaving them up. Unless, as Facebook states, any “direct threat” is made (which would be a criminal matter), removing it will only inflame those that created the sites and those that post there. In this way, they can “vent” all they want, and opposing views (which I am SURE are in the majority) can choose to ignore, create their own “counter” sites, or post their dissenting views on these sites.
@kimkline | # | Top
Kim Kline said
9 months, 4 weeks ago:
@ken-mcclary Well said Ken! And, like you said, we are all here stating their right to post their views despite finding these views totally contrary to our own beliefs!
@kimkline | # | Top
Andrea Vahl said
9 months, 4 weeks ago:
I agree with @ken-mcclary @kc_kreative – while distasteful, we were born with freedom of speech. I just wonder how long it can exist before threats are made.
Seriously – who does this type of thing?
@andrea-vahl | # | Top