Hacker News Reader

Comment by iamleppert | Hacker News Reader

It’s not in Facebook’s business interest to continue to host this kind of politically charged and controversial content. As a publicly traded company, Facebook has a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders.

Every decision they make should be viewed through the lens of, “Is this beneficial to the profit of the company?” If the answer is no, the content should be blocked.

View on HN

> Every decision they make should be viewed through the lens of, “Is this beneficial to the profit of the company?”

Fair. However, we are not they, and should care about more than just Facebook's bottom line.

This may be true when viewed at the micro level, but it's highly debatable at a zoomed out level.

Put it this way, is it in Facebooks best business interests to be viewed as endorsing every single thing it hosts?

Note that the more they pick and choose who to deplatform, the more the ones left will get their implicit seal of approval.

I think we’re getting away from the purpose of Facebook. It’s not intended to be, nor was it ever designed to be a grand mediator of social discourse. It was designed to keep up with friends and casual entertainment. The fact we’ve gotten so far away from what it’s supposed to be is the problem.

I’m in full support of Facebook completely banning any and all content that isn’t completely neutral. That is, get rid of all political content completely.

Cat videos, yes. Political content? No.

You are correct, which is why facebook should be declared and utility and treated as such. Just like your power company cannot do whatever it wants for it's bottom line, neither should facebook

Would you support the government preventing other companies from entering the social media space? Generally utilities have a government sponsored monopoly.

Yes I would

Reply on news.ycombinator.com