Comment by pkphilip | Hacker News Reader

Comment by pkphilip | Hacker News Reader

Facebook's actions in India are absolutely despicable. The head of policy at Facebook in India is a radicalized member of the Indian rightwing and recently put up a post stating that Muslims are a "degenerate community" and was forced to apologise just a couple of days ago because of pressure on FB from their employees.

She gave a half hearted apology. Facebook should have immediately suspended her or sacked her:

https://www.huffingtonpost.in/entry/facebook-ankhi-das-anti-...

She and her sister (who is a politically connected to the ruling BJP party) have publicly been hobnobbing with the BJP and have actively been involved in propaganda. https://twitter.com/SaketGokhale/status/1294653379046596608

During the recent riots in Delhi where many died, the incitement of violence was by a member of the ruling party but has taken no action against Kapil Mishra's account which is still active:

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=283365149510764

His account is still active and he still continues to try and make the Hindus fight the Muslims:

https://www.facebook.com/youth4justice

Whatsapp is also used extensively to share misinformation and hateful content, fueling mob violence and hate, especially targetting the minorities across the country.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/09/whats...

besides that, the ruling party actively uses whatsapp for political reasons, with it's infamous "It Cell" known for manufacturing fake news. https://theprint.in/politics/9500-it-cell-heads-72000-whatsa...

So much so, that the current Home Minsiter of India, Amit Shah was seen in public bragging about the power of the IT Cell to "We can keep making messages go viral, whether they are real or fake, sweet or sour" https://www.thequint.com/news/politics/amit-shah-real-fake-c...

So, I completely understand the concerns about moderation on Facebook itself.

But what would you actually have anyone do about WhatsApp? It's an end-to-end encrypted messaging app, and the whole purpose of end-to-end encryption (which, last I checked, HN was generally in favour of) is that there is no way to surveil or moderate the content of someone's communications.

The intent behind talking about WhatsApp wasn't in terms of moderation, but just WhatsApp-a Facebook product, used as a tool used to spread hate/misinformation for political gains.

edit: and how Whatsapp in general has fractured the information-media ecosystem, sending shock-waves across the democracy.

>It's an end-to-end encrypted messaging app, and the whole purpose of end-to-end encryption (which, last I checked, HN was generally in favour of) is that there is no way to surveil or moderate the content of someone's communications.

AFAIK group chats aren't e2e, and that's where most of the misinformation is shared.

Group chats are E2E in Whatsapp. You’re thinking of Telegram.

Imagine a White person, who is the head of the organization in a country sharing a post that African Americans are a "degenerate community". In any western country, the person would not only be promptly sacked, but would also become untouchable in mainstream organizations.

The Indian politics and judiciary have been compromised by right wing Hindu nationalists and it is impossible to expect anything from them. However, I expected better from Facebook. In a western country Facebook wouldn't think twice about firing any employee who shared such a post.

America is not in a cold war nuclear standoff with an large African nation with whom it shares a border, whereupon millions of it's own citizens may believe that by virtue of their culture then land they live upon should be in said 'African nation' instead of America.

Point being, even though it's terrible ... it's really, really different.

See.

“The Southern Strategy” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

Dog Whistle Politics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_(politics)

I don’t think people have realized that Zuckerberg’s intent is to be the Rupert Murdoch of the 21st century. He’s no ally of liberal society or democracy.

Investors don't mind, users don't seem to care. Can we pinpoint why it is 'bad'? People are making money, signs that the product brings 'value' to society. I am young, how much of the world has Murdoch influenced? Has it all been bad? Sounds like a player that made it. Do we change the game in this case?

Well all those arguments could be made about slave trade to. People made money, investors liked it. Surely it brought value to the society.

> I am young, how much of the world has Murdoch influenced?

That's a testament to his influence, that you can't even imagine a different world.

> Has it all been bad?

Their stance about climate change alone is bad enough to wipe out anything positive they might have done. But yeah, nearly all of it has been bad.

> Sounds like a player that made it.

That's what people said about Stalin and Mao too.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com