[jeffrom]

both of them pretty clearly are on our radar for their political speech (feminism is cancer, “free speech”, soros conspiracies, etc). Given what we know about social media and violence, entertainment value should be a secondary concern.

[hackerpacker]

"Given what we know about social media and violence"

you mean how social media is akin to a pressure relief valve, and how actual violence has gone down since it took off? And how this is probably about clicks and stirring the pot than actual violence, and how this is just going to completely backfire? Shall we burn some books too?

[jerrycruncher]

You're taking an overall reduction in violent crime in the US to mean that hate crimes have also decreased.

The opposite is the case, and it is absolutely because extremist/fringe material has become increasingly and vastly more easily available.

50 dead in Christchurch, scores of Rohyinga in Myanmar, 11 dead in a Pittsburgh Mosque are all victims from what you call a 'pressure relief valve.'

"An FBI report released in November 2018 detailing hate crimes across more than 3,000 police agencies showed a more than 17% uptick in 2017, fueled by increases in attacks against religious and racial minorities. The count documented 7,175 hate crimes in 2017. The tally was 1,054 higher than the year before. It included a 37% increase in anti-Jewish crimes, a 24% increase in attacks on Latinos and a nearly 16% rise in crimes against African Americans."[1]

[1] https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-poway-jewish-hate-...

[ebg13]

> you mean how social media is akin to a pressure relief valve, and how actual violence has gone down since it took off?

I would love to see sources for this. It sounds very interesting and I want to know more.

[pmoriarty]

The likes of Milo are a pressure release valve? In that case, maybe they should be given a medal, since they're helping to prevent violence. Somehow I find that notion to be less than credible.

Milo, Coulter, Savage, and their ilk are extremist trolls, and I have no problem with them being banned from Facebook, just like trolls are regularly banned from HN. It makes for a more civil and less hostile community. The alternative is to let the site devolve in to endless flamewars with people who have no other intention than to get attention and stoke hatred.

This isn't a Freedom of Speech issue, because the First Amendment only prohibits the US government from censoring speech, while this is a case of a private entity refusing to let its platform be used to spew hatred. The First Amendment does not entitle one to have the use of any social media platform you like.

Incidentally, people who have a problem with this should advocate for greater decentralization of communications platforms, which his something that I am in favor of myself. Facebook and other Internet giants have too much power, and we should all oppose that and encourage other means of communication that don't depend on being in the good graces of any one company or even small handful of companies.

In the meantime, people like Milo should crawl back to Stormfront or Breitbart, where I'm sure they'll find no shortage of adulation.

[XorNot]

All these people promote toxic communities that drive away users and lead to harassment and doxing.

[SEJeff]

Citation needed

[jeffrom]

was thinking more along the lines of this study, which shows that "right-wing anti-refugee sentiment on Facebook predicts violent crimes against refugees in municipalities with higher social media usage."

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3082972

[hackerpacker]

that study is a case study in selection bias by someone with a political agenda.

You can't just look at actions by one somewhat arbitrary group against another, and not look at the actions of anyone else, unless you are expressly trying to be misleading.

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

You can see that the other "group" here, whos actions are deliberately being ignored by the author and everyone else with an agenda, have brought a lot of violence of their own to the table. Or at least have enough conflicting data points to not pretend to "know" something about facebook and framed studies.

"The group represented roughly 2 percent of the German population by end of 2017,[10] but was suspected of committing 8.5 percent of crimes (violations off the German alien law are not included). The numbers suggest that the differences could at least to some extent have to do with the fact that the refugees are younger and more often male than the average German. The statistics show that the asylum-group is highly overrepresented for some types of crime. They account for 14.3 percent of all suspects in crimes against life (which include murder, manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter), 12.2 percent of sexual offences, 11.4 percent of thefts and 9.7 percent of body injuries The report also shows differences between the origin of migrants. Syrians are underrepresented as suspects, whereas citizens from most African countries, especially northern Africans are strongly overerrepresented. Afghans and Pakistanis are particularly overerrepresented in sexual offenses.[7][10]"

[jeffrom]

For anyone reading, I’m not responding to this as it doesn’t address anything I, the study, or the original article said.

[whenchamenia]

There is nothing negative about free speech, it is the bedrock of democracy.