American tech companies shouldn't indulge censorship, even if it seems well intentioned, the scope is promised to be limited, and the pressure from governments is immense. They also shouldn't try to pick political winners by promoting the social campaigns and positions of the EC, as they've promised (citation below).
What is legitimate speech should not be determined by whoever is in power. Europe has tried that on several occasions. It never goes well. Just imagine if Donald Trump could declare what speech was considered legal and illegal. Perhaps we're getting a preview from Erdogan in Turkey right now.
This situation appears to be an attempt to suppress dissenting views (largely on immigration, border control, and refugee/asylum policy) following shifts in public opinion away from European integration and establishment incumbents like the CDU/CSU and SPD and toward nationalism and political parties like AfD in Germany, FPO in Austria, and FN in France. Since November Merkel has been pressuring Facebook to sanitize the platform of negative views toward migrants. It is troubling that leaders can punish their citizens for views that break from their policies. State police have even conducted house raids on those promoting "incorrect opinions" toward migrants on social media (citation below). We are not talking about physical threats, we're talking about opinions. Facebook and Twitter should not enable what has become, in a very literal sense, thought police.
If there are window-licking asshats posting nonsense on social media, let's challenge their views and win the debate. Democracy is about more speech, not less. I hope Facebook, Twitter, Google, and Microsoft haven't drifted so far from their original principles that they've lost sight of that.
> American tech companies shouldn't indulge censorship
I'm all for free speech, but US companies should follow the local laws. US tech companies aren't above the law, especially when they do business in foreign countries (selling ads is doing business). It sucks but going against the laws doesn't work in the long run. You can get away with it when you're a young US start up and you don't have offices in France,Germany or Austria, but as soon as you do, you are effectively subject to local laws.
What is legitimate speech should not be determined by whoever is in power. Europe has tried that on several occasions. It never goes well. Just imagine if Donald Trump could declare what speech was considered legal and illegal. Perhaps we're getting a preview from Erdogan in Turkey right now.
This situation appears to be an attempt to suppress dissenting views (largely on immigration, border control, and refugee/asylum policy) following shifts in public opinion away from European integration and establishment incumbents like the CDU/CSU and SPD and toward nationalism and political parties like AfD in Germany, FPO in Austria, and FN in France. Since November Merkel has been pressuring Facebook to sanitize the platform of negative views toward migrants. It is troubling that leaders can punish their citizens for views that break from their policies. State police have even conducted house raids on those promoting "incorrect opinions" toward migrants on social media (citation below). We are not talking about physical threats, we're talking about opinions. Facebook and Twitter should not enable what has become, in a very literal sense, thought police.
If there are window-licking asshats posting nonsense on social media, let's challenge their views and win the debate. Democracy is about more speech, not less. I hope Facebook, Twitter, Google, and Microsoft haven't drifted so far from their original principles that they've lost sight of that.
http://www.dw.com/en/berlin-police-raid-homes-in-crackdown-o...
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36416967