FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Facebook lacking censorship
Facebook lacking censorship
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Last week a 12 year old boy was live streaming on fb while he shot a girl same age.
Mark Zuckerberg has announced fb will be adding thousands to the teams of people censoring the content added on fb. Yet there are thousands of racial discrimination, terrorist groups and other material which shouldn't be allowed.
Has fb grown too fast too quick ??
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's tragic - but where there's live streaming activity happening thousands of times simultaneously how can they monitor and remove them all instantly? It's an impossible task |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Sony removed their feature from the PS4 on launch within 30 mins.
Society should accept responsibility for how sick and stupid we can be.
We need to take that avenue of exposure away from them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's not really about facebook though, that's just a construct used to describe the internet by a specific generation. Am more of the opinion the internet it's a free space that transcends all boarders.
Post what you want, click (x) if you don't like it.
It's the internet there is no gun to your head forcing you to watch other than your own morbid / perverted / political curiosity.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *AA123Couple
over a year ago
Lichfield |
Facebook's guidelines on moderation are closely guarded but were recently leaked to the Guardian. It appears moderators only have a few seconds per post to review each one as the quantity per day is overwhelming.
Facebook say they employed 3000 more moderators after the Government slammed the main social networks for not doing enough.
Some governments are adopting harder lines on social networks now. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We can't monitor the amount of live posts but at the same time I worry about what my son will one day come across ...  "
It's the internet once it's out there it can never be taken down completely... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"
Facebook's guidelines on moderation are closely guarded but were recently leaked to the Guardian. It appears moderators only have a few seconds per post to review each one as the quantity per day is overwhelming.
Facebook say they employed 3000 more moderators after the Government slammed the main social networks for not doing enough.
Some governments are adopting harder lines on social networks now."
They said they are employing more in the next while |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Its Facebook. Not a god given right... also if he's accessing the internet there is far worse just in general on there.
You've allowed or deemed it appropriate for him to access to that world, so... you police him and you educate him.
If Facebook or the state intervened it would be accused of nannying.
How about you take responsibility and he takes responsibility for your individual actions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
A super rich organisation like fb should use more of its money to monitor what it shows. Its moderation rules are very poor when it does find objectionable materials, so it appears an unethical organisation, largely intent on using your details as a commodity for big buck$. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *AA123Couple
over a year ago
Lichfield |
"Its Facebook. Not a god given right... also if he's accessing the internet there is far worse just in general on there.
You've allowed or deemed it appropriate for him to access to that world, so... you police him and you educate him.
If Facebook or the state intervened it would be accused of nannying.
How about you take responsibility and he takes responsibility for your individual actions."
People dont want to take responsibility for their own lives. People take the path of least resistance which is why Facebook fake news became a big issue in the USA elections. p
Social networks can't waive their social responsibility if only to avoid advertisers leaving if it seen to hurt their image to be associated with the darker aspects of social networks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The purpose of fb is to make a profit. It has always done so by extracting as much private information from all it's platforms as it can to monetise advertising revenues
Do not expect it to have morals or concerns for privacy your own or your families welfare especially if any monitoring activities conflict with its duty to maximise shareholders returns.
If you don't want it seen don't post it...
If you don't trust fleecebook don't use it...
And if you do use it then don't be surprised if in the future anything you post turns up in places you don't want it to.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
My attitude to this is that once kids are online you have to assume that at some point filters will fail or unsuitable content will pop up where it shouldn't and that as parents before letting them loose on the Web we should teach them about it and what to do if they see anything inappropriate and how to process it.
In honesty even TV news can show content young children struggle with. Manchester is a current example. You can't shield them from everything so you have to teach them how to handle the bad bits. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *AA123Couple
over a year ago
Lichfield |
"My attitude to this is that once kids are online you have to assume that at some point filters will fail or unsuitable content will pop up where it shouldn't and that as parents before letting them loose on the Web we should teach them about it and what to do if they see anything inappropriate and how to process it.
In honesty even TV news can show content young children struggle with. Manchester is a current example. You can't shield them from everything so you have to teach them how to handle the bad bits. "
Soaps are even worse covering hard hitting subjects at prime time (rape/drugs/violence).
At least with the news you know what you're getting and there's no illusion of entertainment. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Its Facebook. Not a god given right... also if he's accessing the internet there is far worse just in general on there.
You've allowed or deemed it appropriate for him to access to that world, so... you police him and you educate him.
If Facebook or the state intervened it would be accused of nannying.
How about you take responsibility and he takes responsibility for your individual actions."
My kid doesn't use Facebook I just dread the day he will
Being a parent I want to protect him
And I get scared at some of the things I come across on Facebook |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
Big brother is watching 
