Facebook Jail

slo

My tag used to say - I'm a Tonga Toast Junkie :-)
Joined
Feb 28, 2004
I don’t want to sound snarky, but if everyone would treat others the way they want to be treated, why would anyone go in Facebook jail, or to any social media jails?
I’ve never understood why people feel that it’s ok to be mean, insensitive, rude and etc while they are hiding behind a screen. IMO, as more and more of this happens, it’s desensitizing people with controlling their behavior and they are behaving like this out in the world now too. So much ugliness out there - very sad!
 

EACarlson

DIS Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Your implication here that this is common is far from the truth. The fact checkers have a far better rate of being correct than the people constantly posting stuff that gets hit by the gray box.

Not believing fact checkers (who show their detailed work) because it doesn’t align withwhat you want to believe is bias.
That it happens at all means it's happening too much. If you are going to have "fact checking" it needs to be verifiable facts. The only times I've seen fact checkers back up their work it was single source or press releases. If facebook wants to be regulated like a public utility than it needs to treat it's customers like a public utility, if it wants to behave like a publisher than it should welcome the responsibilities of a publisher as well.
 

Karin1984

DIS Veteran
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
I don’t want to sound snarky, but if everyone would treat others the way they want to be treated, why would anyone go in Facebook jail, or to any social media jails?
I’ve never understood why people feel that it’s ok to be mean, insensitive, rude and etc while they are hiding behind a screen. IMO, as more and more of this happens, it’s desensitizing people with controlling their behavior and they are behaving like this out in the world now too. So much ugliness out there - very sad!
The board also has a jail, and when you hear the stories that get people in limbo...

It's probably more an American thing. I have reported at least a dozen people on Dutch public Facebook pages for being racist or sexist etc. and it always comes back with 'we looked into it, we think it's okay'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: slo

Mackenzie Click-Mickelson

Chugging along the path of life
Joined
Oct 23, 2015
I don’t want to sound snarky, but if everyone would treat others the way they want to be treated, why would anyone go in Facebook jail, or to any social media jails?
FWIW there are other reasons why someone would get in trouble on FB that doesn't include treating someone poorly. I rarely report things and instead choose to hide the post or the person but there have been a few instances where some very disturbing images and video were posted. One time I didn't even know what I was watching at first (as the description was not about what the video was) and I had trouble sleeping for days (it was about animals). There's a fine line FB walks where they allow posts when it's intended for informational purposes and then where it's used in a cruel manner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: slo

Starport Seven-Five

DIS Veteran
Joined
Aug 16, 2019
That it happens at all means it's happening too much. If you are going to have "fact checking" it needs to be verifiable facts. The only times I've seen fact checkers back up their work it was single source or press releases. If facebook wants to be regulated like a public utility than it needs to treat it's customers like a public utility, if it wants to behave like a publisher than it should welcome the responsibilities of a publisher as well.
No organization is perfect and publicly available information sometimes changes over time. As I said previously, their hit rate is far above the people who constantly post the crap that gets hit with those fact checks.

Misinformation is a big deal on social media platforms and has resulted in some pretty negative things over the last couple years. I think it's commendable for them to step in and stop the most egregious examples of it.
 

EACarlson

DIS Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
No organization is perfect and publicly available information sometimes changes over time. As I said previously, their hit rate is far above the people who constantly post the crap that gets hit with those fact checks.

Misinformation is a big deal on social media platforms and has resulted in some pretty negative things over the last couple years. I think it's commendable for them to step in and stop the most egregious examples of it.
Then step in and stop the most egregious examples of it. Don't allow one side to call for the burning of buildings with people still inside and then ban people on the other side for calling a biological male a male. Go after the kooks on both sides and I would be satisfied. Decide what you want to be and be that. You don't get the protections of being a public utility while still having the content control of a publisher.
 
  • AndreaA

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Aug 20, 2012
    Then step in and stop the most egregious examples of it. Don't allow one side to call for the burning of buildings with people still inside and then ban people on the other side for calling a biological male a male. Go after the kooks on both sides and I would be satisfied. Decide what you want to be and be that. You don't get the protections of being a public utility while still having the content control of a publisher.
    Yeah, there’s an awful lot of supposed “misinformation” that is really “this fact doesn’t align with our political beliefs even though it’s arguably true or at least reasonably debateable”.
     

    AndreaA

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Aug 20, 2012
    The thing I can’t understand is peoples’ insistence that FB is a “private entity” and can therefore make its own rules, etc., while at the same time arguing that FB (social media in general) is a basic necessity of society nowadays. You don’t see the phone company listening in on calls to see if people are talking about something they don’t like, and FB should be the same thing. Don’t like what you’re seeing on one page? DON’T GO BACK! It’s really NOT that difficult.

    Anyone who thinks that FB is the ONLY or even MAIN source of “misinformation”, they are nuts. I use quotes because it isn’t always misinformation, but instead is biased politically/ideologically... just look at the articles that were flagged about Covid coming from a lab in China and the retraction months later... There will always be idiots of all stripes out there, and they will always find like-minded idiots somehow. FB is basically saying that they’ll accept some idiots, as long as their stripes happen to color coordinate with FB’s.
     

    Mackenzie Click-Mickelson

    Chugging along the path of life
    Joined
    Oct 23, 2015
    The thing I can’t understand is peoples’ insistence that FB is a “private entity” and can therefore make its own rules, etc., while at the same time arguing that FB (social media in general) is a basic necessity of society nowadays.
    There are things in our lives that are so frequently used they just are part of it. Google for instance, Amazon and FB are ones, Twitter is becoming that way (especially how it's used). You can in fact be a private entity largely left to your own devices and yet also be ubiquitous to society. You can also be a public entity and be the same. So I'm not sure what one has to do with another.
    You don’t see the phone company listening in on calls to see if people are talking about something they don’t like,
    Phone companies are regulated, the FCC to name one. Would you like FB and other social media to be government regulated? Already they've come under scrutiny over privacy and data leaks and people wanting more governmental control and oversight. I'm unsure though based on your comments if you would be for that, because that's really what you're asking them to do, conform to a set rules set up and monitored by the government so that they cannot do what you say they are doing.
     

    EACarlson

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Jan 27, 2019
    Phone companies are regulated, the FCC to name one. Would you like FB and other social media to be government regulated? Already they've come under scrutiny over privacy and data leaks and people wanting more governmental control and oversight. I'm unsure though based on your comments if you would be for that, because that's really what you're asking them to do, conform to a set rules set up and monitored by the government so that they cannot do what you say they are doing.
    Then remove the liability protections from the social media companies. They currently have the protections of regulated industry without having to conform to regulations. I don't care which it is, they are either carriers or publishers, if they are carriers then they shouldn't censor what is said on their platforms, if they are publishers than they should be able to be held liable in court for their actions.
     
  • Mackenzie Click-Mickelson

    Chugging along the path of life
    Joined
    Oct 23, 2015
    Then remove the liability protections from the social media companies. They currently have the protections of regulated industry without having to conform to regulations. I don't care which it is, they are either carriers or publishers, if they are carriers then they shouldn't censor what is said on their platforms, if they are publishers than they should be able to be held liable in court for their actions.
    I didn't really follow your conversation with the publishers, etc so apologies but I can't really comment on what you're talking about. I was strictly responding to the phone companies aspect. Phone companies have strict rules they have to adhere to because they have government oversight. I don't really care either way I was commenting there's a reason why phone companies would be different than FB and other social media
     

    Starport Seven-Five

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Aug 16, 2019
    Then step in and stop the most egregious examples of it. Don't allow one side to call for the burning of buildings with people still inside and then ban people on the other side for calling a biological male a male. Go after the kooks on both sides and I would be satisfied. Decide what you want to be and be that. You don't get the protections of being a public utility while still having the content control of a publisher.
    This is a different subject from fact checking.

    Anyone who thinks that FB is the ONLY or even MAIN source of “misinformation”, they are nuts. I use quotes because it isn’t always misinformation, but instead is biased politically/ideologically... just look at the articles that were flagged about Covid coming from a lab in China and the retraction months later... There will always be idiots of all stripes out there, and they will always find like-minded idiots somehow. FB is basically saying that they’ll accept some idiots, as long as their stripes happen to color coordinate with FB’s.
    For clarity on this one, they have pulled back on calling the lab leak false because it is being investigated more thoroughly. There is still no evidence to show a lab leak was the cause and posts claiming so should be flagged.

    When I say "misinformation" I'm talking about straight out false information. There is no political/ideological interpretation to those stories.
     
    Last edited:

    goofyernmost

    Aged to Perfection
    Joined
    Oct 8, 2002
    Facebook doesn't bother me. I think it is because when it first started I didn't make it a challenge to come up with 40,000 friends. I have been active with my account for many years and have only accepted 28 people as friends. Makes for much more pleasant conversations.
     


    Connect

    TODAY'S HEADLINES


















    Top