Anti-refugee attacks in Germany fueled by Facebook usage

[Underseer]

https://hillreporter.com/anti-refugee-attacks-in-germany-were-driven-by-facebook-usage-6119

As social media responsibility continues to come under attack a new report suggests that anti-refugee attacks in Germany were led with help from Facebook.

When a radical imam ramps up hateful rhetoric that results in acts of violence by crazies, is he to be held responsible? What about whoever provided him a platform to broadcast his hate from? Are they also responsible for the resulting violence?

What about anti-immigrant or anti-Muslim rhetoric from white supremacists on social media that results in acts of violence? Should those spreading the hate be held responsible? Should the social media sites that provide a platform for spreading that hate be held responsible?

 

[Worldtraveller]

https://hillreporter.com/anti-refugee-attacks-in-germany-were-driven-by-facebook-usage-6119

As social media responsibility continues to come under attack a new report suggests that anti-refugee attacks in Germany were led with help from Facebook.

When a radical imam ramps up hateful rhetoric that results in acts of violence by crazies, is he to be held responsible? What about whoever provided him a platform to broadcast his hate from? Are they also responsible for the resulting violence?

What about anti-immigrant or anti-Muslim rhetoric from white supremacists on social media that results in acts of violence? Should those spreading the hate be held responsible? Should the social media sites that provide a platform for spreading that hate be held responsible?

This is a weird new world of social media. There aren't really any legal precedents for how to handle this. Now, FB should at least be consistent when enforcing 'community standards', but even that seems too much to ask.

If these yokels meet in a pub, it's not the pub-owner's responsibility, but social media is different enough that there aren't really any good parallels. I'm torn, actually. The people who do these things should definitely be held responsible, but I'm a little more leery about trying to hold social media responsible, because there is a potentially slippery slope there.

 

[Underseer]

https://hillreporter.com/anti-refugee-attacks-in-germany-were-driven-by-facebook-usage-6119

As social media responsibility continues to come under attack a new report suggests that anti-refugee attacks in Germany were led with help from Facebook.

When a radical imam ramps up hateful rhetoric that results in acts of violence by crazies, is he to be held responsible? What about whoever provided him a platform to broadcast his hate from? Are they also responsible for the resulting violence?

What about anti-immigrant or anti-Muslim rhetoric from white supremacists on social media that results in acts of violence? Should those spreading the hate be held responsible? Should the social media sites that provide a platform for spreading that hate be held responsible?

This is a weird new world of social media. There aren't really any legal precedents for how to handle this. Now, FB should at least be consistent when enforcing 'community standards', but even that seems too much to ask.

If these yokels meet in a pub, it's not the pub-owner's responsibility, but social media is different enough that there aren't really any good parallels. I'm torn, actually. The people who do these things should definitely be held responsible, but I'm a little more leery about trying to hold social media responsible, because there is a potentially slippery slope there.

What about imams spreading hate about "infidels" and "zionists"? Should they have a platform on social media?

I'm not so conflicted about this. One of the standards has always been that free speech doesn't allow you to yell fire in a crowded theater because the rights of other people to not die supersedes your right to say whatever you want. As Americans typically phrase it, your rights end at the tip of your nose; once something impacts the rights of others, it is not your right anymore.

Since the anti-immigrant rhetoric of xenophobic assholes and the rhetoric of radical imams interferes with the rights of other people to not be the victims of violence, free speech simply doesn't apply regardless of whether social media is run by the gov't or private entities.

 

[ronburgundy]

Should the social media sites that provide a platform for spreading that hate be held responsible?

No moreso than the makers of the computers used to type the messages, and no moreso than those who make pens and paper on which most calls for violence were written in up until a couple decades ago. IOW, no.

If a medium is doing something that specifically encourages or courts their medium to be used for violence, then that is a different story. But if it is a neutral medium that merely allows humans to convey any type of information to each other, than no, they are not responsible.