• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Oct 29, 2017
6,248
Took too long--and only because he wanted to curry favor with Trump to keep antitrust law at bay, not "freedom of expression".

I'd love to hope that this will cripple the whole "movement", but at this point I'm skeptical.
 

krazen

Member
Oct 27, 2017
13,108
Gentrified Brooklyn
Lol. Looking forward to them walking it back now we will have actual Qanon politicians in congress and thus real pressure to keep the bullshit around.

Drown in piss, Zuck
 
Last edited:

1.21Gigawatts

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,278
Munich
The damage is done and it was done deliberately.

But this makes me think that Facebook is expecting a Trump loss and it wants to avoid prosecution for spreading enemy propaganda and misinformation to the American people.
 

kalindana

Member
Oct 28, 2018
3,121
So do they remove the individual users or just the group pages? You should be removed from the platform entirely for associating with them, without warning. If they dissolve the groups but allow the users to stay, they will just set themselves on a new platform later. Get rid of them, full stop, without warning, so they're just set adrift without connections.
From Facebook's press release:
"Starting today, we will remove any Facebook Pages, Groups and Instagram accounts representing QAnon, even if they contain no violent content."
about.fb.com

An Update to How We Address Movements and Organizations Tied to Violence | Meta

Taking action against Facebook Pages, Groups and Instagram accounts tied to QAnon, offline anarchist groups that support violent acts amidst protests, and US-based militia organizations.
 

echoshifting

very salt heavy
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
14,663
The Negative Zone
Lol who are they kidding. Fuck Facebook and fuck Zuckerberg. Regulate the shit out of social media please. If they didn't need regulation this would have happened years ago.
 

CDX

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,476
Did Reddit already ban them?

Twitter and YouTube need to act next.
 

fontguy

Avenger
Oct 8, 2018
16,147
Enforcement of rules on social media has an inverse relationship with Trump's polling.
 

Tavernade

Tavernade
Moderator
Sep 18, 2018
8,609
How capable of this is Facebook? Wasn't there an issue of them not deleting pages from the militia of the Rittinghouse (sp?) guy despite multiple people alerting them?
 

elLOaSTy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,842
Section 230 scaring social platforms into having to at least not support the right wing for clicks. If they were smart they would be actively fighting against it, but this is good and also disappointing that it took so long and is the bare minimum of what they should be doing.
 

Ogre

Member
Mar 26, 2018
435
This is a good thing. Good possibility for big downstream effects. Facebook has been a key tool for the acceleration of authoritarianism, and deplatforming Qanon this close to the election could be fairly massive.

Accessibility and ease of use are a massive part of why FB is so successful with Boomers, and alternatives for mass-scale organization have been generally unsuccessful.
 

Typographenia

Member
Oct 27, 2017
557
Los Angeles
Cool.

Too bad allowing it to continue for so long has already caused irreparable damage and allowed ridiculous consipiracy theories to fester and grow at an alarming rate.
 

SolidSnakex

Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,304
Dude they probably have their own facebook by now

It's not really the same thing. The appeal for groups like this to be on Facebook or Twitter is that it allows them to loop in people who previously had no idea about it. Having their equivalent to a Facebook or Twitter is just an echo chamber where they're unable to recruit new people.
 

Carbon

Deploying the stealth Cruise Missile
Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,837
Good, but 6 months late Marky Mark and the Faschy Bunch
 

Ogre

Member
Mar 26, 2018
435
At some point, FB should have realized that Republicans, more than anything, want to regulate it. It's in their best interest to deplatform authoritarian interests for that reason alone.
 

Rassilon

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,581
UK
jvps7jqjzdp11.gif
 

captmcblack

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,058
Until this stuff is purged from every functioning social media platform, people aren't safe.

This shit and every single vector for conspiracist disinformation - MLMs, flat earth, plandemic Bill Gates NWO corona 5g foolishness, etc - needs to be banished to the most backwater irrelevant Internet a la the 90s, trapped in spam e-mail forwards and on unindexed Wix pages where people get no audience and no money. It's gotta go, straight up.

No Youtube, no Reddit, no IG, no Tiktok, no Twitch, no FB live streams, nothing. Keep that shit off the next-gen social media and alt-social media too.
 

Kyuuji

The Favonius Fox
Member
Nov 8, 2017
31,902
It's a drop in the ocean for that company but I'll take whatever drips they're willing to enact at this point.
 

Jeremy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,639
This is fucking late, of course, but very welcome.

They will probably just rebrand, but better to do this now than after the election.

Still, this likely shows that Zuck knows the Dems will be in control and is doing this to prevent very necessary government oversight.
 

erlim

Member
Oct 26, 2017
5,502
London
A morbid amount of our country is very likely too far gone, lost in a ridiculous and dangerous delusion thanks to these platforms. Too little too late.
 

Scuffed

Member
Oct 28, 2017
10,815
It's never too late to deplatform hate imo. This will be effective especially when other companies follow suit. Sure there will be the anti-semitic clap back because it's Zuckerberg but overall this will damage them greatly. Milo and Alex Jones are nothings now so this shit works.
 

bluexy

Comics Enabler & Freelance Games Journalist
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
14,507
This may actually be some very important messaging regarding how Facebook believes the upcoming election will go. If Facebook believed Trump was going to win, it's difficult to imagine taking this action considering how vocal Trump is against platforms that he believes "censors" his base.

So why do this? Biden has previously threatened to revoke the law that protects Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms from lawsuits based on the content posted therein. It's called Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. In other words, if a white supremacist group on Facebook carries out an act discussed on their group page, Facebook could be found liable.

Facebook may be taking action to show that it can self-regulate and that revoking 230 may not be necessary.
 

RustyNails

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
24,586
Whats the catch? What if a grandma is discussing Q with somebody, is she removed from facebook?
 

Trey

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,913
This may actually be some very important messaging regarding how Facebook believes the upcoming election will go. If Facebook believed Trump was going to win, it's difficult to imagine taking this action considering how vocal Trump is against platforms that he believes "censors" his base.

So why do this? Biden has previously threatened to revoke the law that protects Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms from lawsuits based on the content posted therein. It's called Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. In other words, if a white supremacist group on Facebook carries out an act discussed on their group page, Facebook could be found liable.

Facebook may be taking action to show that it can self-regulate and that revoking 230 may not be necessary.

When has Biden talked about this? Trump and the Republicans are currently wielding this specific threat - they even wrote up an executive order about it to waste paper on.
 

Kthulhu

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,670
So why do this? Biden has previously threatened to revoke the law that protects Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms from lawsuits based on the content posted therein. It's called Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. In other words, if a white supremacist group on Facebook carries out an act discussed on their group page, Facebook could be found liable.

Facebook may be taking action to show that it can self-regulate and that revoking 230 may not be necessary.

Doubtful IMO. I think Facebook is more concerned about antitrust issues.

Section 230 going away is mostly saber rattling from Republicans and pro surveillance Dems. It's probably not going anywhere as it'd kill all companies that host user generated content that are based in the US.
 

Deleted member 283

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,288
This may actually be some very important messaging regarding how Facebook believes the upcoming election will go. If Facebook believed Trump was going to win, it's difficult to imagine taking this action considering how vocal Trump is against platforms that he believes "censors" his base.

So why do this? Biden has previously threatened to revoke the law that protects Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms from lawsuits based on the content posted therein. It's called Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. In other words, if a white supremacist group on Facebook carries out an act discussed on their group page, Facebook could be found liable.

Facebook may be taking action to show that it can self-regulate and that revoking 230 may not be necessary.
Actually, it's interesting. Because Trump himself tweeted today about wanting to revoke that same law, I believe.

Of course, in Trump's case, it's anyone's guess if he even knows what the thing even does or why exactly he tweeted that or whatever.
But yeah, with Trump also threatening that... It pretty much leaves them no choice but to do stuff like this either way, if I'm understanding right.