[morgante]

> I have no problem with that. I have a problem with them choosing what I can share with my friends, and more generally what people can share with each other.

They're not policing what you share with your friends, just what you can do on their platform. They are under no obligation to provide infinite reach for whatever drivel you want to share.

If you're sitting in a bar sharing racist anecdotes with your friends, that bar has the right to kick you out if they feel like. It's their bar.

If you don't like what Facebook's policies, go share somewhere else. There's even an alt-right social network you'll fit right in on.

> The problem is that they are not open. My only problem is opacity.

They're completely open about it. They've posted multiple stories about how they're addressing this, will provide links to third-party analysis for any flagged stories, and list the criteria for third-party fact-checking. [0]

> Moreover they coordinate with politics, so this has everything to do with the Bill of Rights at this point.

No, it does not. The Bill of Rights restrains what the government can do, it has nothing to do with what individual corporations can do.

Do you also think Smith & Wesson should be required to provide free guns, since the right to bear arms is in the constitution?

[0] http://www.poynter.org/fact-checkers-code-of-principles/

[legostormtroopr]

> If you're sitting in a bar sharing racist anecdotes with your friends, that bar has the right to kick you out if they feel like.

Except for a lot of people there is no other bar. Your friends are in that bar, the bar has used their position to close other bars. And the only other bar still open is 20 miles away in a basement.

> If you don't like what Facebook's policies, go share somewhere else. There's even an alt-right social network you'll fit right in on.

The media is pushing the line "Alt-right == Nazi", so you are calling someone a Nazi because they have issues with Facebook controlling what their users see. After Facebook has already admitted to large scale manipulation of their users emotions[0].

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/29/facebook-...

[morgante]

There are tons of other bars. What exactly has Facebook done to close other bars?

Twitter is still around and very popular. So is Reddit. Heck, there's even a social network built just for people like you: https://gab.ai/

[r2dnb]

>It has nothing to do with what individual corporations can do.

My point was that we should pay attention as "citizens" because Freedom of Speech is / may be concerned. I wasn't trying to build a legal case with references accurate enough to be received by a judge. This is a about "Freedom of Speech" is the only thing I was trying to say.

>If you don't like what Facebook's policies, go share somewhere else

You're ignoring my point on the fact that FB is not a corporation like another. According to you Microsoft could have gotten away with : "People can use another OS" in the 90s, but this is not how things worked out. We need to respect law and understand why this kind of laws have been put in place. We paid a huge price before understandind why we needed them, repeating history will be expensive.

I can understand your point, I hope you could understand mine too even if you disagree.

Finally

>Will provide links to third-party analysis for any flagged stories, and list the criteria for third-party fact-checking. [0]

Thanks, this is interesting. Let's see how it turns out.

[dabockster]

> If you don't like what Facebook's policies, go share somewhere else.

Okay, I'll just go find another social network where millions of non-technical individuals congregate en masss.

Oh wait...

[jwtadvice]

Facebook censored me when I tried to share the Snowden Documents.

I barely trusted them before and haven't trusted them since.