- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Facebook Co-Founder Says Social Networks to Face More Regulation
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:21 pm
Eduardo Saverin, co-founder of Facebook Inc., said social networks are heading for more regulation and change, as political pressures mount and users fragment into specialized
“It’s not a question of if, it’s a question of the type of regulation,” Saverin said at the Bloomberg Sooner Than You Think technology summit in Singapore
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-06/facebook-co-founder-says-social-networks-to-face-more-regulation
“It’s not a question of if, it’s a question of the type of regulation,” Saverin said at the Bloomberg Sooner Than You Think technology summit in Singapore
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-06/facebook-co-founder-says-social-networks-to-face-more-regulation
7
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:24 pm to SDVTiger
I always find it a bit interesting that some conservatives think net neutrality was a bad thing, and consequently the "free market" a good thing. Yet those same people also often favor heavy regulation of facebook, twitter, etc.
Quite the interesting paradigm...
Quite the interesting paradigm...
This post was edited on 9/6/18 at 2:28 pm
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:24 pm to SDVTiger
quote:
fragment into specialized
SPECIALIZED WHAT?!??!!
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:25 pm to NYNolaguy1
Let the great triggering begin
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:25 pm to SDVTiger
Small
Market
Conservative
Market
Conservative
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:26 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:Net Neutrality is a bad thing. So is more regulation of the net via social media.
I always find it a bit interesting that some conservatives think net neutrality was a bad thing, and consequently the "free market" a ood thing. Yet those same people also often favor heavy regulation of facebook, twitter, etc.
Quite the interesting paradigm...
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:29 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Net Neutrality is a bad thing. So is more regulation of the net via social media.
I tend to agree with you either way. If one should be regulated so should the other.
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:29 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Quite the interesting paradigm...
Compounded by the fact that large tech companies have a pretty cozy relationship with the MIC and intelligence complex.
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:35 pm to SDVTiger
quote:
It’s not a question of if, it’s a question of the type of regulation
If you remain an open platform then you get a pass from regulations.
If you promote political content from one party while suppressing the other you get classified as a content distributor and media outlet and you get all the regulation that comes with that.
If you use a social media platform like Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram daily; you get your news from those sites; and you participate in identity politics and nonsensical Multilevel marketing scams then you are an idiot and you deserve all of the violations of privacy and speech to which you subject yourself.
The answer here is not regulate social media via government intervention and growth of power. It is to use the free market. Stop going on those worthless websites and apps. Nothing good comes from them. And they are not in any way shape or form important enough to endow the federal government with extra powers and bureaucracy.
This post was edited on 9/6/18 at 2:44 pm
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:36 pm to SDVTiger
quote:
More Regulation
frick that. Imagine the Pandora’s box this will open.
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:42 pm to gamatt53
quote:
More Regulation
frick that.
Exactly.
More power should be given to the federal government only in extreme circumstances and under the highest of scrutiny.
The owners of social Media platforms acting like idiots does not rise the level of necessary government intervention.
Can someone explain to me how Facebook and Twitter's horrible business decisions deserve government bureaucracy and oversight.
I'm beginning to think all of this "Russians meddling" nonsense is just the fog cloud used by the DC elite to gain government control over social media.
This post was edited on 9/6/18 at 2:44 pm
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:43 pm to Nguyener
quote:
Can someone explain to me how Facebook and Twitter's horrible business decisions deserve government bureaucracy and oversight.
“Because it hurt my fee-fees!”
-this board
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:51 pm to gamatt53
Did FB, Twitter, or Google provide any services to the US govt, receive any money from the govt in the form of tax breaks, or compensation for services?
If the answer is yes, slap on the sanctions. They cannot he allowed to sway public opinion via censorship of one side.
If the answer is yes, slap on the sanctions. They cannot he allowed to sway public opinion via censorship of one side.
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:51 pm to Nguyener
quote:
If you promote political content from one party while suppressing the other you get classified as a content distributor and media outlet and you get all the regulation that comes with that.
So if the bakers decide not to bake the gay dildo cake, they get regulated for enacting their right to refuse business?
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:51 pm to Nguyener
Because the act of forcing a change in behavior through free market mechanisms is messy and slow. It’s much easier to run to nanny state big government and demand regulation.
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:52 pm to NYNolaguy1
No, bc there are an abundance of bakers.
No social media alternatives.
No social media alternatives.
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:52 pm to gamatt53
This board has never called for regulating social media you dipshit. A couple posters may have but definitely not this board in general.
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:54 pm to Ollieoxenfree99
quote:
No, bc there are an abundance of bakers.
I sense there will be a very unbiased person/people making that distinction.
I just dont buy into the idea that some companies have the freedom to refuse business and speech and others dont.
Posted on 9/6/18 at 2:58 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
So if the bakers decide not to bake the gay dildo cake, they get regulated for enacting their right to refuse business?
Do you not understand the difference between a bakery and a media company?
A news content provider and a restaurant?
I do not mean any offense, but your analogy is ignorant and nonsensical.
Facebook and Twitter share a shield from libel, slander, and other journalism laws and regulations because they are free platforms and not bias media content promoters. Those are treated differently. They do not currently have liability for the content on their platforms. However, if they stop being a free platform and become a content promoter or news organization then they deserve to lose that privilege as a consequence of their free decision
This post was edited on 9/6/18 at 3:02 pm
Posted on 9/6/18 at 3:01 pm to TigerChief10
quote:
This board has never called for regulating social media you dipshit. A couple posters may have but definitely not this board in general.
Yes it has dipshit. All it took was one tweet from trump and this board was all for it.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News