Facebook, Twitter could face up to €50 million fines in Germany for failing to promptly...

[Jos]

German lawmakers have approved a controversial bill aimed at cracking down on hate speech on social networks, under which sites like Facebook and Twitter could face fines of up to €50 million ($57 million) for failing to delete such postings within 24 hours.

The Social Networks Enforcement Law, also known as “Facebook Law”, was first announced in March by Justice Minister Heiko Maas and it is now slated to go into effect starting this October.

Haas asserts that the law will not infringe on free speech, but critics argue that it essentially shifts the burden of law enforcement from public authorities to private companies. They say that the tight time limits are unrealistic, and will lead to censorship as technology companies will prefer to be cautious and delete ambiguous posts to avoid paying penalties.

According to Justice Minister Heiko Maas, experience had shown that without political pressure, "the large platform operators would not fulfill their obligations" to take down illegal content. Engadget points out that Facebook, Twitter and Google struck a deal with Germany in 2015 to pull down hate speech and other content, but failed to meet that commitment according to a government report.

There are certain criteria to determine the amount that a company would be fined and how quickly they are expected to take down content. Penalties start at €5 million and could rise up to €50 million. Content that is “obvously illegal” — including hate speech, defamation, and incitements to violence — must be taken down within 24 hours, and within a week in particularly complex cases.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/69945-facebook-twitter-could-face-up-50-million-fines.html

 

[petert]

I guess they have to hire some extra dipshits to keep an eye on the stuff and promptly remove hate speech. I don't think it can be done automatically.

 

[davislane1]

Nazi Germany --> Banned speech under the premise of maintaining social order and decorum.

Modern Germany --> Bans speech under the premise of maintaining social order and decorum.

When they start sending "racists" and "xenophobes" to detention facilities, we can finally get to the real historical point in all this. Namely:

"Hitler did nothing wrong." -- Modern Progressives

 

[petert]

Nazi Germany --> Banned speech under the premise of maintaining social order and decorum.

Modern Germany --> Bans speech under the premise of maintaining social order and decorum.

When they start sending "racists" and "xenophobes" to detention facilities, we can finally get to the real historical point in all this. Namely:

"Hitler did nothing wrong." -- Modern Progressives

I think you missed the point of the article - they aren't suppose to go after the haters but to force the social networks to trim their brainfarts. It is not done for decorum or social order - it is done on a request basis as far as I know - so if it doesn't bother you it stays there. Can it be abused? sure - but some system needs to be in place, you cannot let any 15 year old with spare time to spread crap. Anyway is utterly retarded to go online and post hate speech ... kinda says something about your priorities. I sometimes do it, cause I have my own limitations. But the last thing that crossed my mind would be to imply that such a fruitful endeavour like spreading hate qualifies as free speech or at least needs legal protection of some sort. Problem is that people don't understand what free speech is.

 

[davislane1]

I think you missed the point of the article - they aren't suppose to go after the haters but to force the social networks to trim their brainfarts. It is not done for decorum or social order - it is done on a request basis as far as I know - so if it doesn't bother you it stays there. Can it be abused? sure - but some system needs to be in place, you cannot let any 15 year old with spare time to spread crap. Anyway is utterly retarded to go online and post hate speech ... kinda says something about your priorities. I sometimes do it, cause I have my own limitations. But the last thing that crossed my mind would be to imply that such a fruitful endeavour like spreading hate qualifies as free speech or at least needs legal protection of some sort. Problem is that people don't understand what free speech is.

Nazis gonna do what Nazis do, which includes forbidding speech deemed socially disruptive. I get the point of the article. I also get the point of the policy. What the Nazi-sympathizers don't seem to understand are the actual effects of these policies and their historical consequences.

The Nazi says, "hate speech isn't free speech." So all the well-meaning Germans say, "alright, fine." Then the Nazis say you don't have a right to speak hate speech and will be punished for facilitating it. Hate has no place in a progressive society. So all the well-meaning Germans say, "Sure, that makes sense. Fine media outlets if they don't remove hate speech from their platforms." So the hate-speakers take to the streets. The Nazis say, "these are political terrorists with a message of hate. They shall be locked up," and all the nice, well-meaning Germans, who just want civility and inclusion, quitely go about their afternoon, ignoring the hate speakers being rounded up and stuffed into train cars.

I repeat: Hitler did nothing wrong, as evidenced by his own policies being advocated by German officials and members of this forum.

 

[ArdvarkMaster]

If Facebook etc were truly for free speech, as they always claim, they could decide to simply lock their products out of regions that limit or have no free speech. Instead they work with governments like Germany and China to censor what goes out to the unwashed masses.

Why do they do this? Money.

 

[alabama man]

Should be higher fines, 50 million is nothing to them. As long as they do nothing you raise the fine for 10 million a day.

 

[JaredTheDragon]

Since hate speech isn't real, this is all just another censorship ploy. An illusion of free speech - until you say something another free person doesn't like? That's not what "free" means. It's a pretty simply word with an equally simple concept.

These sites and platforms aren't about freedom, they're about revenue.

 

[Chazz]

Nazi Germany --> Banned speech under the premise of maintaining social order and decorum.

Modern Germany --> Bans speech under the premise of maintaining social order and decorum.

When they start sending "racists" and "xenophobes" to detention facilities, we can finally get to the real historical point in all this. Namely:

"Hitler did nothing wrong." -- Modern Progressives

Whenever anyone is oppressive, hateful and uncompromising they're called nazis. So you're saying the true Nazis should not take precautions and safeguards to ensure their people don't **** the pooch again? Didnt erdogan just call them nazis a few days ago? Lol okay... When your people take free hate speech to the level of world domination, id forgive and actually applaude you for trying to ensure you dont repeat the past. Or no... They're just talking....surely they'd never do anything...its just words.....

 

[davislane1]

So you're saying the true Nazis should not take precautions and safeguards to ensure their people don't **** the pooch again?

No. I'm calling those who seek to ban speech Nazis, becasue they support the same policies.

 

[Chazz]

Even if the ones banning free speech were THE Nazis? If this were any other country I'd agree with you, but those guys took a lot of flak, had their country broken in half and they just want to try and move on from the nonsense. They, of all people, should have the right to limit hate speech. I mean.... I applaud them for this. So you're calling them Nazi's cause they're trying to not repeat the BS that made them Nazis? That just seems so weird. That in itself is why they're so touchy about hate speech. You're calling them Nazis for trying not to be Nazis. They don't want to be called Nazis anymore so they're trying ont to be Nazis but them trying not to be Nazis makes them Nazis.

I feel I said that word too much...Nazis

 

[davislane1]

So you're calling them Nazi's cause they're trying to not repeat the BS that made them Nazis? That just seems so weird. That in itself is why they're so touchy about hate speech. You're calling them Nazis for trying not to be Nazis. They don't want to be called Nazis anymore so they're trying ont to be Nazis but them trying not to be Nazis makes them Nazis.

No.

You don't seem to get it. I am calling them Nazis for repeating what the Nazis did. The National Socialist Party did not start with genocide and conquest. They started with social policies like this. They laid the ground work, and, once it was in place and they had sufficiently conditioned the population to ignore and/or dehumanize the Jewish population, they commenced with the forced labor and exterminations.

Replace the word "racist" with "Jew" in any of the arguments made for these limitations and you have a verbatim copy of Nazi-era propaganda.

But you know what, I'm not just going to make the claim. I will demonstrate it.

History (1933): Nazis commence with the destruction of books deemed to be harmful to the Nazi agenda

Today (2017): Progressives demand the destruction of content deemed to be harmful to the Progressive agenda.

History (1933-1934): Jewish (and non-Aryan) citizens (I.e. people who do not agree with their worldview) are excluded from civil service.

Today (2017): Progressives demand anyone who has "racist" or "xenophobic" or "sexist" views (I.e. people who do not agree with their worldview) be removed from government.

History (1937-1938): The Nazis force Jews out of business.

Today (2017): Progressives demand racists, xenophobes, bigots, and mysogynists (I.e. people who do not agree with their worldview) be driven out of business and employment.

Progressives are Nazis. They just swapped out the swastika and Aryan supremacy with a rainbow and Otherness.

 

[psycros]

So you're calling them Nazi's cause they're trying to not repeat the BS that made them Nazis? That just seems so weird. That in itself is why they're so touchy about hate speech. You're calling them Nazis for trying not to be Nazis. They don't want to be called Nazis anymore so they're trying ont to be Nazis but them trying not to be Nazis makes them Nazis.

No.

You don't seem to get it. I am calling them Nazis for repeating what the Nazis did. The National Socialist Party did not start with genocide and conquest. They started with social policies like this. They laid the ground work, and, once it was in place and they had sufficiently conditioned the population to ignore and/or dehumanize the Jewish population, they commenced with the forced labor and exterminations.

Replace the word "racist" with "Jew" in any of the arguments made for these limitations and you have a verbatim copy of Nazi-era propaganda.

But you know what, I'm not just going to make the claim. I will demonstrate it.

History (1933): Nazis commence with the destruction of books deemed to be harmful to the Nazi agenda

Today (2017): Progressives demand the destruction of content deemed to be harmful to the Progressive agenda.

History (1933-1934): Jewish (and non-Aryan) citizens (I.e. people who do not agree with their worldview) are excluded from civil service.

Today (2017): Progressives demand anyone who has "racist" or "xenophobic" or "sexist" views (I.e. people who do not agree with their worldview) be removed from government.

History (1937-1938): The Nazis force Jews out of business.

Today (2017): Progressives demand racists, xenophobes, bigots, and mysogynists (I.e. people who do not agree with their worldview) be driven out of business and employment.

Progressives are Nazis. They just swapped out the swastika and Aryan supremacy with a rainbow and Otherness.

Its refreshing to see someone who is both well-informed AND unfazed by the intimidation of the fascists. That's really the proper word to use when describing the modern day brownshirts menacing western civilization, although many of them ARE rabidly anti-Semitic so maybe "Nazi" is accurate.

 

[davislane1]

Its refreshing to see someone who is both well-informed AND unfazed by the intimidation of the fascists. That's really the proper word to use when describing the modern day brownshirts menacing western civilization, although many of them ARE rabidly anti-Semitic so maybe "Nazi" is accurate.

As if the post were prohpetic, this just hit YouTube: