But this is just a little too on-the-nose.
Warning that users who call for the suspension of bigoted accounts might just be afraid of a real debate, Facebook representatives told reporters Tuesday that classifying hate speech can be difficult because some posts actually make very interesting points. “At Facebook, we are committed to combating violence and hate speech on our platform, but can you really call these posts hate speech when a lot of them are based on science and logic?” said Monika Bickert, head of global policy management at Facebook, claiming that unless you’re a sheep who just swallows everything the mainstream media sells you, a number of these posts had a lot to consider, and even if you don’t completely agree with the attacks on race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation, it should not be a crime to make people think. “If you’re as open-minded as you claim, you will see that while some of these posts cross the line, many of them are really nuanced and make good points. Of course, everyone should feel safe on Facebook, but it’s hard to determine what’s threatening because the more you watch these videos, the more you realize that Islam might be incompatible with west. Maybe people are just scared of hearing the truth.” Bickert added that if people were such big fans of policing speech, she had some eye-opening videos on globalism she could share on Facebook.
Maybe Sam Harris is moonlighting as a writer for them now.
I fully expect to see this on r/atetheonion in the near future.
And, you know, Hitler had some interesting ideas about racial purity, and German superiority – here at Facebook we might not agree with everything he says, but he is nuanced and makes good points. Maybe people are just scared of hearing the truth.
This Onion article is barely satire in light of this recent article: https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/25/18229714/cognizant-facebook-content-moderator-interviews-trauma-working-conditions-arizona
Given that one of Facebook’s responses to criticism in the past has been to try and imply that its critics are part of a larger conspiracy funded by George Soros, the satire is not far off the mark…
The onion was important at the start of the Dubya era, but then they started breaking real news because that administration was already beyond satire. And they’ve never really recovered.
#PZ and #5: The Onion is generally absurdist – not strictly confined to ‘satire’ from a fictional scenario standpoint, although their main features are written up that way. They’ve been pointing out real news whenever it qualifies as absurd at the tail of every newsletter for a long time. Most of their written feature content is reserved for targeting rightwing politics and fake noise as well as celebrity gossip, entertainment and sports items. How better to highlight the lunacy of the times than to pick out examples of what currently passes for ‘actual mainstream’ news? It seems perfectly appropriate for alert arachnidiarists to keep at least one of their 8 eyes on those wacky humans at all times.
@#2: Charles Lindbergh, is that you?
There comes a point in every empire’s lifecycle where satire becomes not only indistinguishable from serious reporting by the officially-sanctioned agencies, but truer. A nation is in decline when only its fools and jesters dare to tell the truth. This is the end, people.
@numberobis #5
I just realised what “Dubya” means from reading your post. From across the pond I’ve been thinking it was the surname of some WH official during Bush 2. facepalm Thank you.
=8)-DX
ironically, I said those very words when Jon Stewart became the most popular source for REAL news in the US.
then I left, because what else are you supposed to do when you come to this conclusion, and everybody around you just laughs.
most of the US STILL thinks this is all some kind of lark.