Facebook bans extremist leaders for far-right, anti-semitic speech

Channel: Fox Business
Published: 3 hours ago

Description
“A New Textbook of Americanism” author Jonathan Hoenig, former investment banker Carol Roth, Kaltbaum Capital Management President Gary Kaltbaum and FBN’s Kristina Partsinevelos on how Facebook banned extremist figures from its website. FOX Business Network (FBN) is a financial news channel de...



Transcript
We have to move on to facebook, which is now permanently banning far-right extremists and anti-semitic political leaders, people they have designated, as quote dangerous. Those banned today include louis farrakhan, alex jones and milo e innopolis. Now a facebook spokesperson telling fox business quote: we've always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, re ...
ardless of ideology. So is facebook going too far? No i'm delighted to see this they're taking out the trash. These awful people in many cases, encouraging violence, sanctioning violence. Look you have no right to speak on someone else's platform, let milo yin a palapa, let's go to geo cities or myspace or something he can't go on. Facebook andthe fact is what they need david. More than anything is clear: objective rules. People need to understand what are the guidelines, what are the laws, but i think this is a positive thing, because facebook has been in our attack for months now about not doing enough to clean up some of the trash. That'S on its site, i applaud it. I am so happy. I went after jonathan on this one.

You know what look i just think facebook has every right to deal with their platform and how they want to do it. The question is: is who is the arbiter? What'S their background, what are their beliefs and are they gon na be down? The middle thatthat is gon na, be a question going forward. I really have no problem with doing it. I don't like hate speech. I don't like anything that incites violence and i'm hoping they get it right. Well to your point, facebook has listed out several factors that they used to check so they're, not just going after some alt right extremists. These people have to check off several boxes, either eliciting hate comments or just flat-out lives like we know, alex jones has done with sandy hook and lying and saying that that entire travesty was a fraud. To that point, though, facebook and i think i agree a lot with both of you - facebook, it's a company right, we don'tlike regulation, then it should regulate itself. It should go forward, especially considering how much it's been involved with the myanmar genocide. The fact that there's been brides sold and south sudan on facebook - and it elicited a bidding war, spoke and then even a what's up and facebook owns. What'S app, there was a rumor on there and that led to the burning of two men in mexico. So facebook needs to step in no, no, no, no, no, you guys are all dead wrong on this one.

I will first say that i hate louis farrakhan, with every fiber of my being. I am a facebook shareholder, i'm an avid user of twitter. I do not think thatany of these people should be deep platform, because i believe in free speech as a concept i'm not saying legally legally, they have the right to do whatever they want, but as a principle of free speech. Unless you are directly inciting violence or you are breaking a law when you start to go, this is hate speech, or this is distasteful. That becomes a very slippery slope and where does that go to then go to your eye and wait wait here. Let me finish: does that go to your isp? Does that go to mastercard and visa has been happening to people? This is a slippery slope when you let a few people with power decide whatis, acceptable speech. I don't like it at all. Are you i hate disagreeing with carol on anything, no, no regulations. I said as a principle when i hear somebody saying they want to eradicate jews off the face of the earth, i'm good with them going bye-bye, it's as pretty much simple as that decades. For anybody, any race, creed or color here so here's the problem - and you know i'm jewish and i hate it too, but we counteract bad speech with reason. We want to know who our enemies are and what happens when we speak out against palestine and then they say: well, i'm sorry you're being hateful towards palestine, guess what jews you're off theplatform to barrett and gary. It cuts both ways and that's why you have to by the way the flushed amendment.

The first amendment is not about protecting safe speech. The first amendment has a dangerous element in it and i see jonathan nodding. Yes, you know what i'm talking about right. Jonathan well, in also the first moment, does not apply to private companies. This is not a carol, i'm sorry! This is not a first amendment. That'S true, facebook is not down. I'M not saying i am saying on principle: there's a beach there's, a difference between being objectionable, which you'd brought a palestine and a difference between hate and, like jonathan just said, that kirsten mana doesn'tquite, a private company nation, a bunch of people on facebook. We'Re well - and we know by the way we know. Excuse me, we know who they're using to make those judgments, and some of those people have a very curious ways of defining people. For example, louis farrakhan is described as a right winger in in the the listing or the announcement that they were gon na cut him out. I don't think he's a right winger i made. Maybe he's you know, he's not a socialist or say, but the point is: is that people make judgments and you have to know who those people are and it's a brave new world.

Therein lies the warrior: yes, it who'sthe army and they run her and they run a risk if facebook gets a reputation for excluding right-wing or left-wing or anything else for really prohibiting political speech, then run a risk to their own viability in their own box. Jonathan you're getting very good at the last word. I must say: congratulations that.


Watch Next

Loading...