I think I’m less pissed off by the lies than I am by how poorly they are lying.
“Hey folks, yeah we SAID we would do this before we did it. Then we did and we didn’t stop until threatened with retaliation.... but it doesn’t mean it was intentional. That’s crazy!”
Neither side is a good guy in this battle — Facebook is a censorship cesspool already, and the Australian Government is pushing a free speech stifling law that will essentially ban aggregator link-posts to news sources by sites except for those owned by tech overlords large enough to afford and leverage negotiated fees, and excludes “non significant” reporting from qualifying for payments at the same time.
It’s a setup designed to benefit both corporate mainstream media and big tech by creating a huge legal and monetary barrier to entry for news startups, small aggregator sites, bloggers, independent reporters, etc. and introduce a new avenue for censorship based on opaque non-speech-content reasons that don’t have to be explained except with ‘contract terms’ and ‘compliance with applicable laws’ corporatese runaround.
It’s also a template for exporting this shit censorship system around the world.
Facebook’s actions are best explained as corporate muscle-flexing to get better financial terms for their side of the whole scam, not a stand for free speech nor an attempt to actually censor Australia’s government-kowtowing MSM.
I think I’m less pissed off by the lies than I am by how poorly they are lying.
“Hey folks, yeah we SAID we would do this before we did it. Then we did and we didn’t stop until threatened with retaliation.... but it doesn’t mean it was intentional. That’s crazy!”
Yea I’m sure they’re not playing any of the usual games at all!
Neither side is a good guy in this battle — Facebook is a censorship cesspool already, and the Australian Government is pushing a free speech stifling law that will essentially ban aggregator link-posts to news sources by sites except for those owned by tech overlords large enough to afford and leverage negotiated fees, and excludes “non significant” reporting from qualifying for payments at the same time.
It’s a setup designed to benefit both corporate mainstream media and big tech by creating a huge legal and monetary barrier to entry for news startups, small aggregator sites, bloggers, independent reporters, etc. and introduce a new avenue for censorship based on opaque non-speech-content reasons that don’t have to be explained except with ‘contract terms’ and ‘compliance with applicable laws’ corporatese runaround.
It’s also a template for exporting this shit censorship system around the world.
Facebook’s actions are best explained as corporate muscle-flexing to get better financial terms for their side of the whole scam, not a stand for free speech nor an attempt to actually censor Australia’s government-kowtowing MSM.
Correction: They say "some" content was inadvertently block but "quickly" reversed. Same pile of bs, though.