Quote:
Originally Posted by blackmonsters
Facebook and Instagram are expanding their ban on white supremacy on their platforms, almost two weeks after a shooter associated with such ideology committed the worst terror attack in New Zealand history and livestreamed it on Facebook.
"We're announcing a ban on praise, support and representation of white nationalism and separatism on Facebook and Instagram, which we'll start enforcing next week.
It's clear that these concepts are deeply linked to organized hate groups and have no place on our services," the company announced in a post on its newsroom site on Wednesday...
https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/fa...ea dlines_hed |
Interesting. So Facebook and Instagram are, by this action, making a
correlation between that crap
not being banned on their platforms at the time the shooting took place, and the shooting taking place?
Is this like a roundabout or indirect admission of guilt? Are they saying they were, at the time, to some degree responsible for, or complicit to, the action of the shooter? If so, does this mean the victims' families have legal standing to sue Facebook and Instagram for directly or indirectly aiding and abetting the shooter, by not already having had that crap banned at the time the shooting took place?
Such a can of worms this opens. So many questions that arise from this. Someone chime in and enlighten me with your 2 cents.