Where is the line drawn? What makes a comment racist vs. just the opinion of the poster? If someone speaks out against another country, does that automatically mean their comments are racist and should be censored? Who determines where this line is? How is it enforced?
Where does a group's rights begin and end? Is it okay for a group with similar beliefs to come together as a unit, even if their beliefs differ from the norm of society? When does it cross the line and become classified as a hate group? Just curious here, considering that fact that the net is worldwide, encompassing many countries and cultures, who determines the norm on the net?
Quote:
Asked to respond to the claims that it was not doing enough to stamp out racism on the site, Facebook said it took all complaints by users seriously and there was a "dedicated team" investigating such complaints, which can be made through the "report" function on any page of the site.
"Facebook is a platform, and as such we sometimes see users posting about, debating and discussing controversial issues," the company said.
"However, this alone is not a reason to disable a group. Facebook will investigate, and will remove any content that violates our Terms of Use."
Facebook's Terms of Use explicitly state that users can be banned if they post "any content that we deem to be harmful, threatening, unlawful, defamatory, infringing, abusive, inflammatory, harassing, vulgar, obscene, fraudulent, invasive of privacy or publicity rights, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable". http://www.smh.com.au/news/technolog...585086888.html
|
Who at Facebook makes this determination? Based on some of the complaints filed, are they actually actively monitoring this? Should they?
If a member of a dating site mentions on their profile that they are only interested in meeting a particular race, is that a racist comment? Based on the article below, can someone tell me when "gay" became a race? Did I miss something?
Quote:
"You can't legislate taste, and we're not seeking to legislate taste," Mansfield explains. "What we're saying is that if you're going to express your preference you can express it clearly, by simply saying, for example, I prefer Caucasian guys - it's fairly overt, it's not driving anything underground - rather than saying "no" - no GAMS, no whites, no blacks, no Italians, or whatever. The simple change in phrasing makes it a lot less confronting for other people, and vilification speech is harmful."
http://www.fridae.com/newsfeatures/2...-online-racism
|
You tell me, where is the line drawn?
If I start a group of Dallas Cowboys fans who speaking out against the Chicago Bears, am I some sort of football racist? If I start a group for Christians and speak out against satan worshippers, am I racist?
(please note that I am not making light of the seriousness of racism, but rather asking questions to open the topic for an open and honest discussion.)
If you are going to participate in this debate, I am going to first ask that you review our
special rules for the politics forum. I will be expecting you to back up your thoughts with your reason
WHY you feel that way. Additionally, if you state something as fact, please provide evidence.
Play nice! I will not tolerate disrespect in this thread or anywhere in the community.
Racism vs. Opinion
Threaded Mode
