This topic contains 21 replies, has 14 voices, and was last updated by 
hellraider 3 years, 12 months ago.
The only way to fight a bad guy with a hate is a good guy with a “like.”
This is the impression left by the words on Wednesday of Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg.
As the Guardian reports, Sandberg was at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, when she made some observations about fighting Isis and similarly dangerous groups.
She gave the example of a neo-Nazi party’s Facebook page. She described how people with good hearts went onto the page and offered positivity — a “like-attack,” as she called it — rather than the destructive hate speech.
“The best thing to speak against recruitment by Isis are the voices of people who were recruited by Isis, understand what the true experience is, have escaped and have come back to tell the truth,” she said. “Counter-speech to the speech that is perpetuating hate we think by far is the best answer.”
Clearly, Sandberg’s intentions are good. However, even the perception that something as inconsequential as a “like-attack” can truly have a deep effect might trouble some.
Terrorist activity on social networks is a problem that’s finally being officially recognized by tech companies. However, there seems to be little agreement between the tech world and the government about what should be done.
Tech CEOs claim to be guarding their privacy rules — though some seem more flexible about those than others. Apple CEO Tim Cook, for example, has been a staunch opponent of a so-called backdoor that the government could use to snoop on certain activity.
Earlier this month, executives from Apple, Microsoft and, indeed, Facebook met with government officials to discuss further action that might be taken.
I suspect that action may be clandestine. It’s not as if either the government or tech companies are likely to announce that, yes indeed, they’re taking more aggressive online action against Isis.
It’s not as if ISIS is entirely overt either about which Facebook accounts are promulgators of its cause.
In November, a Facebook spokesman told Wired: “There is no place for terrorists on Facebook. We work aggressively to ensure that we do not have terrorists or terror groups using the site, and we also remove any content that praises or supports terrorism.”
They’re there, though. Which is why the mere idea of a “like-attack” might seem painfully inconsequential.
Positive words might help the status of relationships. When it comes to terrorist groups, rather more aggressive and covert means might be called for.
I bathe in the tears of single moms.
And it’s not a joke.
The only way to fight a bad guy with a hate is a good guy with a “like.”
This is the impression left by the words on Wednesday of Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg.
As the Guardian reports, Sandberg was at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, when she made some observations about fighting Isis and similarly dangerous groups.
She gave the example of a neo-Nazi party’s Facebook page. She described how people with good hearts went onto the page and offered positivity — a “like-attack,” as she called it — rather than the destructive hate speech.
“The best thing to speak against recruitment by Isis are the voices of people who were recruited by Isis, understand what the true experience is, have escaped and have come back to tell the truth,” she said. “Counter-speech to the speech that is perpetuating hate we think by far is the best answer.”
Clearly, Sandberg’s intentions are good. However, even the perception that something as inconsequential as a “like-attack” can truly have a deep effect might trouble some.
Terrorist activity on social networks is a problem that’s finally being officially recognized by tech companies. However, there seems to be little agreement between the tech world and the government about what should be done.
Tech CEOs claim to be guarding their privacy rules — though some seem more flexible about those than others. Apple CEO Tim Cook, for example, has been a staunch opponent of a so-called backdoor that the government could use to snoop on certain activity.
Earlier this month, executives from Apple, Microsoft and, indeed, Facebook met with government officials to discuss further action that might be taken.
I suspect that action may be clandestine. It’s not as if either the government or tech companies are likely to announce that, yes indeed, they’re taking more aggressive online action against Isis.
It’s not as if ISIS is entirely overt either about which Facebook accounts are promulgators of its cause.
In November, a Facebook spokesman told Wired: “There is no place for terrorists on Facebook. We work aggressively to ensure that we do not have terrorists or terror groups using the site, and we also remove any content that praises or supports terrorism.”
They’re there, though. Which is why the mere idea of a “like-attack” might seem painfully inconsequential.
Positive words might help the status of relationships. When it comes to terrorist groups, rather more aggressive and covert means might be called for.
I bathe in the tears of single moms.
Anonymous
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
921526
921524
919244
916783
915526
915524
915354
915129
914037
909862
908811
908810
908500
908465
908464
908300
907963
907895
907477
902002
901301
901106
901105
901104
901024
901017
900393
900392
900391
900390
899038
898980
896844
896798
896797
895983
895850
895848
893740
893036
891671
891670
891336
891017
890865
889894
889741
889058
888157
887960
887768
886321
886306
885519
884948
883951
881340
881339
880491
878671
878351
877678
