640
submitted 2 years ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

Elon Musk has until the end of Wednesday to respond to demands from Brussels to remove graphic images and disinformation linked to the violence in Israel from his social network X — or face the full force of Europe's new social media rules.

Thierry Breton, the European Union commissioner who oversees the bloc's Digital Services Act (DSA) rules, wrote to the owner of X, formerly Twitter, to warn Musk of his obligations under the bloc's content rules.

If Musk fails to comply, the EU's rules state X could face fines of up to 6 percent of its revenue for potential wrongdoing. Under the regulations, social media companies are obliged to remove all forms of hate speech, incitement to violence and other gruesome images or propaganda that promote terrorist organizations.

Since Hamas launched its violent attacks on Israel on October 7, X has been flooded with images, videos and hashtags depicting — in graphic detail — how hundreds of Israelis have been murdered or kidnapped. Under X's own policies, such material should also be removed immediately.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] rentar42@kbin.social 100 points 2 years ago

Get out of here with your silly US-centric idea of "absolute free speech". Pretty much every civilized country in the world has boundaries to what is considered acceptable.

And even the US does (though they are fewer than elsewhere, granted).

But for some reason the US has produced this myth that absolute freedom of speech (which it doesn't have) somehow is the best possible choice (which it isn't).

[-] quindraco@lemm.ee 15 points 2 years ago

A free press is hardly a US-centric idea.

[-] rentar42@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It isn't and it's a good idea.

But somehow the US doesn't seem to be as good at having one as they might want to think:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Press_Freedom_Index

It's not terrible in that index, but it's below most European countries.

Edit: or maybe you prefer an index by a US instituation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_the_Press_(report) the ranking looks pretty similar, though.

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Free speech and free press are vital to intellectual progress.

Information needs to be exchanged to grow.

[-] prole@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

They were referring to absolute free speech. Something that many people in the US believe to be a real thing.

[-] HerrBeter@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

My favourite is "absolute free speech!!" combined with "if you say something someone doesn't like, they are entitled to punch you"

Or "freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences" lmao but then it's not [absolute] free speech

[-] Silejonu@kbin.social 29 points 2 years ago

No, you don't understand, it's easy:

  • if the government punishes you for what you said, it's an attack on Free Speech™
  • if woke Twitter cancels you for what you said, it's an attack on Free Speech™
  • if a far-right/Republican shoots you down for what you said, it's just the consequences of your Free Speech™
  • if you're writing a book about sexual education, it's not Free Speech™ anymore, and you should be censored

Easy, huh? /s

[-] NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social 13 points 2 years ago

Its freedom of speech from the government not carte blanche to say what you want.

Granted even that is still slightly restricted.

It baffles me that y'all are ok with being muzzled.

Straight talk time.

Those images should be posted and not removed.

People need to see what is happening for them to react.

Pictures and videos proved the holocaust to the world.

Pictures and videos got the us out of Vietnam

People need to see things that make them viscerally uncomfortable.

[-] maynarkh@feddit.nl 22 points 2 years ago

The only images the EU asked to have removed are images from unrelated conflicts and video games portrayed as geniune images of the current events, so blatant disinformation.

It's in the request made by the EU. The Politico article made up the part where all graphic images are to be removed.

[-] markr@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

Politico is engaged in blatant disinformation. How surprising. The actual text of the letter from the EU is online and it is very clear what they are demanding.

[-] tburkhol@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

I kinda want to see if we can post enough screenshots from DayZ and Left 4 Dead, calling them photos from our neighborhood to get the AI media to report on a global zombie virus.

[-] crandlecan@mander.xyz 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

That is context I did not have and falls under fake news / propaganda. I have no problem seeing dumb false shit removed.

[-] wewbull@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago

Its freedom of speech from the government not carte blanche to say what you want.

No other institution can instill punishment for speech except the government, so freedom of speech from the government means freedom of speech absolute. Joe Blogs migh have a pop at me, but then he's guilty of assault. My employer might decide my views are not consistent with theirs, but unless I was acting as their representative at the time most decent worker protection laws across the globe would deem it as you acting as a private individual, and therefore none of your employer's concern.

Now, is it polite, civil and sociable to say certain things? No, but if I'm prepared to contravene social etiquette, I can say whatever I want under a system of protected speech from the government.

[-] Strykker@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago

The images in question were photos and videos from previous conflicts or video games being passed off as photos and videos of the ongoing conflict.

This is not a free speech issue this is a prevention of misinformation.

[-] crandlecan@mander.xyz 1 points 2 years ago

Thank you! I wrote my edit before I read any replies but that's exactly it 👍

[-] agent_flounder@lemmy.one 9 points 2 years ago

My favourite is "absolute free speech!!" combined with "if you say something someone doesn't like, they are entitled to punch you"

Anyone who says that is forgetting that punching falls under assault.

Hate speech is far beyond merely "something I don't like". It is advocating for the oppression and even eradication of people based on their very identity.

Hate speech should not be tolerated if we want to live in a society that tolerates the existence of others. (So called "paradox of tolerance" which is really not a paradox when you frame it as I have). We can tolerate the existence of bigoted assholes but prohibit them spreading their bigotry. Otherwise we live in a society that supports intolerance.

[-] crandlecan@mander.xyz 1 points 2 years ago
[-] stealthnerd@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

The concept of absolute freedom of speech is based on lessons learned in history and even the present. As soon as you start limiting speech you have to draw a line and nobody can agree on where that line should be. The real issue however, is that it's ultimately government that decides.

A government that can limit few speech gets to decide what acceptable speech is and that's a dangerous power in the hands of the wrong people.

There's definitely consequences to unhinderred free speech but I think history shows us that the alternative is worse.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 33 points 2 years ago

So...

You think it should be legal for any random person to stand outside your house with a megaphone telling everyone that you're a child abuser and the only way to protect the kids is to immediately kill you?

[-] ThirdWorldOrder@lemm.ee 12 points 2 years ago

I believe the classic example is yelling “fire” in a crowded theater

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

Yeah, but when explaining it to someone with zero empathy, they dont understand unless it's explicitly about them...

If "fire in a theater" would work on that person, it would have already. It's not some obscure example no one's ever heard of before...

[-] Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 2 years ago

Which ironically is actually legal in the US. The big lines are libel, slander, defamation, incitement to imminent lawless action, fraud, threats and child pornography.

Assuming the person is not actually a child abuser, the example they used would actually cross the line in the US but really only for a civil case, rather than criminal. It wouldn't even count as incitement unless he was calling for the alleged child abuser to be lynched or something, even "someone ought to string up this child abuser" probably doesn't count as incitement.

[-] stealthnerd@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

No I don't personally believe in absolute free speech I was just trying to offer perspective in response to a comment that was rejecting the concept outright.

I do enjoy the rise it got out of this audience though.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

That's so much sadder than if you were being authentically stupid....

[-] stealthnerd@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

What's sad is you being mean to a person for simply making a comment on a social media platform.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

I do enjoy the rise it got out of this audience though

Wait...

I thought you just said you were trolling...

Now your serious and it was a legitimate question?

JK, I don't give a fuck, I'm not even sure why I didn't block you already.

[-] stealthnerd@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

What? I never said I was trolling. I said I was offering a different perspective.

It's so bizarre how people are attacking me for that. You would think I said something awful.

I did enjoy the reaction that my original comment got but only because the comment wasn't intended to stir up controversy or invoke a strong reaction but clearly has.

I was contributing to a conversation with a comment that I feel was quite harmless. I didn't know free speech absolutism was such a feather rustling topic.

[-] alignedchaos@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 years ago

Did you really just go from “I think history shows us that the alternative is worse” to this?

cringe

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

I do enjoy the rise it got out of this audience though.

Enjoying people being unhappy with you is not a very good life outlook.

[-] maynarkh@feddit.nl 18 points 2 years ago

A government that can limit few speech gets to decide what acceptable speech is and that’s a dangerous power in the hands of the wrong people.

The life hack we use in Europe is that we have more than two parties and a functioning electoral system, so the regulatory capture of corporations and their fascist leaning CEOs is only partial. That makes it easier to draw the line where people want it to, since we can vote out our government.

[-] zhl@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 years ago

The lesson learned from history, at least when it came to drafting the German Basic Law in 1948/49, is that freedom of speech must bow to the sanctity of human dignity, as does everything else.

[-] crandlecan@mander.xyz 2 points 2 years ago

Indeed. Something the USA probably will never learn

[-] DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 2 years ago

This is a slippery slope logical fallacy.

As in A is like B is like C [...] is like Z.

In the case at hand, no one is talking about censoring someone's spicy take on bidenomics - is a binary question of "is this image likely to support extremism".

History does not show that censoring this type of material leads to an autocracy.

[-] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 4 points 2 years ago

On the flip side, i learned from the finest Free Speech Absolutist that absolute free speech is absolute bullshit, as it's less about free speech and more about my speech.

[-] crandlecan@mander.xyz 1 points 2 years ago

I am not American. I am European. Thanks for playing. Try to read what someone actually wrote next time.

this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2023
640 points (100.0% liked)

World News

45984 readers
2800 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS