Re:Facebook Bans Louis Farrakhan, Milo Yiannopoulos, InfoWar...
by thatcat on Thursday May 02, 2019 @11:58PM
(#19815393)
If 4 billion people are in your house, is it really still your house?
Re:Facebook Bans Louis Farrakhan, Milo Yiannopoulos, InfoWar...
by dblotsky on Friday May 03, 2019 @02:58AM
(#19816178)
Yeah, just with 4 billion people in it.
The analogy also doesn’t work because it’s impossible to have 4 billion people in your house.
Re:Facebook Bans Louis Farrakhan, Milo Yiannopoulos, InfoWar...
by TKWasRight on Friday May 03, 2019 @12:27AM
(#19815547)
> The shareholders of Facebook are entitled to run their company as they see fit. Because they own it.
That isn't entirely true when we are talking about "customer discrimination"...we'd be having a completely different conversation if Facebook came out and said "we're going to ban Filipinos" or "we're banning those who express anti-war sentiments"...it's a lot easier when the people being persecuted are right-wing nationalists, anti-Israel, or conspiracy nuts...
The shareholders of Facebook are entitled to run their company as they see fit. Because they own it. Like you can paint the walls of your house whatever colour you like, and if visitors don't like it, then that's their problem.
If we think that Facebook has grown too powerful and intrusive into society to be governed by its shareholders, then nationalisation is completely the correct way to go.
Of course, which nation gets to buy Facebook is another concern... given its global reach, is it really appropriate for the US government to own it? Should the UN "globalise" it instead of the US "nationalising" it?