Solomon Islands Set To Ban Facebook in the Name of 'National Unity' (abc.net.au) 73
The Solomon Islands Government has defended its decision to place a temporary ban on Facebook, a move it says is aimed at tackling cyberbullying and online defamation. From a report: The ban, which has not yet come into effect, received an angry response online after it was announced last week. Communications officials are expected to meet with internet and telecommunications providers in Solomon Islands to discuss how they will block the world's largest social media network. Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare told the nation's Parliament the ban was necessary in order to preserve national unity. "Cyberbullying on Facebook is widespread, people have been defamed by users who use fake names, and people's reputations that have been built up over the years [are destroyed] in a matter of minutes," he said. Mr Sogavare said the planned ban mainly targeted young people, but said it was aimed at protecting them from "vile abusive language" and not an attempt at silencing them.
It will divide the nation along age lines (Score:3, Insightful)
Good work!
Whether this move is meant to silence young people or not, that's how it's going to be perceived.
Re:It will divide the nation along age lines (Score:5, Insightful)
Young people only use Facebook to send photos to their grandparents.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Here in the US, half of them still admit to using it.
I'm willing to bet the number is much higher, although most of the naysayers probably only use it occasionally.
And then there's IG.
Re: (Score:1)
As a youth advisor for my church who works with a lot of teenagers in many congregations, I can confirm this. Facebook is for my generation and they use it pretty much just to keep in touch with us. Their most popular platforms change fairly regularly, although Instagram seems to have the most staying power. Snapchat and Tumblr appear to be on the wane, TikTok is pretty popular, and Discord is on the rise, moving beyond a platform just for gamers.
Re:It will divide the nation along age lines (Score:4, Interesting)
Interesting. From what I've observed, the primary social media groups among the young tend to be closed discussion mediums. Whatsapp, telegram, to a lesser extent signal.
Basically things that are minimally curated by outsiders of the group or not curated at all by them. Youth want to choose who they interact with, and create their own social circles. It's the same mentality that results in both life lasting friendships and bullying, which is universal to humanity. I imagine the reason why facebook, twitter etc are so toxic is specifically because they attempt to forcibly break these natural boundaries in the name of keeping people engaged and clicking through more pages on the platform and therefore showing more ads and collecting more personal information. The general toxicity is likely a natural outcome of forced breaking of the natural personal boundaries, where people are forced to meet new people who are either "of similar opinion as I but more extreme" or "the extreme opposites of my opinion". Neither are people that most people gravitate to naturally in everyday lives.
I would even go as far as to wager that the reason why we usually don't sort ourselves into such groups naturally without the algorithmic manipulation is an evolved trait specifically selected over long period of time. Imagine a society where this sort of sorting was a norm. It would fall apart under internal strain rapidly, and therefore be selected out by evolution.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you're overthinking it. You make good points, but the main reason the youth gravitate toward "closed discussion mediums" is so they're parents can't see what they're up to.
Re: (Score:2)
"their"—I can't believe I did that. I can't help but correct my own grammar. And calling myself a disparaging name for one who impulsively corrects another person's grammar on the internet apparently triggers /.'s new "lameness filter."
Re: (Score:2)
Ability of parents to control what's happening is similar there, don't you think? It's not like closed facebook groups are out there in the open for everyone to see.
Re: It will divide the nation along age lines (Score:2)
The important thing is that their parents do not know what they are or how they work.
Re: (Score:2)
That was true some ten years ago or so. Today's parents are the first "digital generation". Youngest parents are already born after 2000 and haven't known "life without internet" at all. They have whatsapp and they have facebook. And they know that their kids can hide stuff on their phones.
Remember, this is 2020. The only time when "current year" argument is actually relevant.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As a youth advisor for my church who works with a lot of teenagers in many congregations,
Wow, you still have youth at church? The average age of congregations is about 70 here. Too much enlightenment, too many scandals.
Re: (Score:1)
It's Unitarian Universalist.
Re: (Score:2)
It's Unitarian Universalist.
Interesting. I had assumed you meant Christian, but that looks more like a social club with singing, than a religion :-) No belief in God required.
I can see it appealing to youth, googled and there is one in my city, but their website photos show a lot of grey hair! Maybe I'll check it out.
Re: (Score:2)
Once again demonstrating you have no clue about the world around you? Young people are still very much using Facebook for sharing all sorts of pointless shit. Not as much as millennials did but they are still very much active.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No they can't. You specifically mentioned talking to their grandma. The only place they can do that is on whatever platform their grandma uses.
Network effect is a thing you should look up before proposing "easy" solutions.
Re:It will divide the nation along age lines (Score:5, Funny)
I knew /. would have a Solomon Islands cultural expert!
Re: (Score:2)
It will be perceived that way primarily only amongst young people. It will be perceived as silencing each of the age brackets that generally get pigeonholed.
And the people who will be most put out by this are exactly the ones causing the problems in the first place.
Social Media, like population response to COVID, are both solid examples of "Power to the People" (that rallying cry that we've heard for many decades). And both show what it's like (certainly for Western Countries, most especially USA/UK). A
Re: (Score:2)
"Whether this move is meant to silence young people "
The young people fled after meemaw and peepaw befriended them.
Re: (Score:2)
"Whether this move is meant to silence young people "
The young people fled after meemaw and peepaw befriended them.
Pretty much this. As well, Younger people tend to engage in fads more often. As soon as older people took over Facebook, it became so not cool for teenagers. In my admittedly not wide circles of facebook contacts, there are almost no people under 21. One relatives daughter was on FB, but I think she left around Junior High school age. Plus FB is a different type of toxicity. Kids have bullying and cliques to deal with. Meemaw and Peepaw have weird conspiracies, political data weaponization and illiterates t
Re: (Score:3)
The problem with social media is its lack of weight of the content.
Some random guy saying a group of people is doing some really scary things, without evidence or anything to back up such claims will get more response to. Some professional journalist reporting on some less scary things, and is backed up with facts and sources. Because we want to cling to the really scary stuff, while the less scary stuff seem so minor compared to the really scary stuff.
Just Facebook? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Then the kids will play in a smaller cesspool containing far less mental sewage. It's a win.
Re:Just Facebook? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
The internet is like garage space; no matter how big it is, it still fills up with crap almost immediately.
I feel like that should be on a poster or something lol
Re: (Score:2)
i thought the kids did instagram not facebook
Re: (Score:2)
You should jump on Twitter and send the guy a Fleet that he's a stupid moron who should jump off a high building.
I mean that would be mean but it would prove the point nicely.
The sentiment is there. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not so sure it'll backfire. It's a strong message to send, and I suspect many places will be looking with interest at how it plays out in a small environment.
Re: (Score:2)
Not so sure it'll backfire. It's a strong message to send, and I suspect many places will be looking with interest at how it plays out in a small environment.
If it sends the right message to Zuckerberg et al, Its a good thing. As Facebook has aged into retiree's space in recent times, it might find itself in a quandary. It's not cool any more, and even the older folks can get bored with it - because it is pretty boring.
Sounds nice... (Score:1)
Sounds nice... the right thing for the wrong reasons??
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds nice... the right thing for the wrong reasons??
I'm confused - did you mean to write "the wrong thing for the right reasons"?
Re: (Score:1)
I'm confused - did you mean to write "the wrong thing for the right reasons"?
Of course not; Facebook sucks and so does censorship.
Re: (Score:2)
Tackling bullying and disinformation would seem like a good thing to pin this action to. So perhaps an ethically grey thing to do for the right reasons?
Best guess: someone called out the Prime Minister (Score:4, Interesting)
for corruption, so he decided to attack the source media with the usual excuse: "Think of the children! Won't somebody please save the children!"
Re:Best guess: someone called out the Prime Minist (Score:5, Insightful)
TFA contains an image captioned "The Government has recently faced criticism over leaked documents on Facebook that showed how COVID-19 funds had been spent.", so there's your explanation. Can't put the genie back in the bottle, though, and they're about to learn that.
Re:Best guess: someone called out the Prime Minist (Score:4, Interesting)
sure you can, you flood the market with disinformation. You run a ton of fake news and news partly based on reality but the rest based on massive hyperbole. Eventually people wont even believe the truth when it happens. It works here in the US.
Let's get this implemented worldwide (Score:2)
Who really needs Facebook any way? It's a good way to stalk people and for conspiracy groups, but does it really have a use outside of that?
Re: (Score:2)
My mother is in a group that shares videos of pimple-popping. Does that count as a use? No, I don't get it either, some people just have a weird fascination with pus.
Good for them! (Score:4, Insightful)
I hope that they retain the balls and the backbone necessary to keep up the ban. Facebook is the ultimate evil and we should celebrate every attempt to restrict or kill it.
Facebook just allows people to communicate (Score:2)
People say a lot of hurtful sh*t to each other over the phone too, but no one blames the phone company.
Some part of human nature, more in some people, less in others, includes bullying and defamation. Facebook is just another platform on which that can occur, and it can be easier to see it there than in other places. I'm not sure why people misattribute and then say the platform is evil.
As another example: The Internet (many computers on it)
Any excuse will do (Score:5, Interesting)
Any reason for banning Facebook is a good one! Let's hope the rest of the world picks up on this!
Re: (Score:2)
And replace it with what?
You jump into the same attack that others do without thinking about any of the consequences. Ban Facebook? The only reason I'm on Facebook is to keep in touch with people. Please setup the alternative before you start banning people, I know it may be soppy but I actually do occasionally like keeping in touch with my mother.
Oh and I use it for sending messages (not everyone is on WhatsApp), and for finding and registering for events all around. 15 People were shot in Vienna in my Aun
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Seriously, you can't think of any other way to send a picture and some text to others beyond Facebook?
I'm certain he's quite competent regarding that stuff. But are the recipients?
But there is a point - a lot of virtual computer illiterates only find Facebook as a good way to get photos. I know people who use FB as storage for their pix. Bottom feeding stupid, for sure, but this is what we get with the wider internet. To them, FaceBook is the internet
Back in the day, a person had to be pretty smart to even get on the Internet. There were kooksto be certain, but they were fairly intelligent kooks.
Tod
Re: (Score:2)
I could telegram her, Oh wait she's not on telegram. I could Whatsapp her, oh wait she's not on whatsapp, I could email... but where does that end, what next send postcards?
The only suitable form of communication is one which is easy and one which can be received. I can think of many ways to send a picture. I can think of none more suitable than Facebook.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"And replace it with what?" Something that isn't run by a psychopath like Zuckerberg.
Good start, Get right on it. When it's up and running I'll jump in and send all my friends a friend request. Then we can ban facebook.
Re: (Score:2)
And replace it with what?
Ducks, if I have my way. I love ducks.
Re: (Score:2)
And replace it with what?
Twitter?
In all seriousness, I would like to see it replaced with something that is decentralized and uses P2P. Basically, a protocol rather than a service.
Re: (Score:1)
are you online? Better get off, there's a train coming.
Re: (Score:2)
You have no idea what's going on in the Solomon Islands. The Communist Chinese put in a puppet as prime minister (who has broken relations with Taiwan) and has been buying up real estate....in some cases have of entire islands. An independence movement has started up.
The Chinese are moving into the Pacific and banning Facebook is a way of cutting dissident communications.
good and bad (Score:2)
What is needed is for us to have VETTED digital certificates. using these does not mean that other users will know who you are, but it will mean that a site can then control who has access to the using them. In addition, for those that abuse the site or others, they can be blocked site-wide, or user-wide. In addition, by having things like VDC, it makes poss
Re: Social media is needed. (Score:1)
No, it isn't, The Human race has existed for millenia without what passes for Social Media. As a species, we don't need it one bit.
IT isn't social. More like Anti-Social.
It is designed to be highly addictive you know like illegal drugs.
The sooner it dies a death the better.
Solomon ideas (Score:3)
I guess this is the best idea the Solomon islands had since that 'cut the baby in half' debacle.
Re: (Score:2)
Is this what we've come to? (Score:2)
I see comments praising this 'ban', without actually considering it is a huge infringement on the rights of citizens to make their own choices.
Ok, lets have a little look at the problems the Solomon Islands face, shall we:
"The threats include invasive species; loss of major land and marine habitats; over exploitation of natural resources; destructive harvesting techniques; and climate change from sea level rise and more frequent destructive climatic events."
I would hope than any logical person would concur
Re: (Score:1)
Secure Scuttlebutt (Score:2)
We can do that? Why didn't anyone tell me? (Score:2)
Facebook is the absolute nightmare of free speech.
The entire reason free speech work(s)/(ed) is that truth spreads mouth to mouth quicker than lies. The smarter population acted as a break slowing and stopping the lies. Before the internet, lies would die out as truth out-spread it.
But the internet changes that. Now the more alarming beliefs spread faster than the more reasonable ones. Lies spread into every nook and cranny and stay there even when smart people start pointing out that the FBI are the
Young People??? (Score:2)
"Mr Sogavare said the planned ban mainly targeted young people"
Mr Sogavare should perhaps do some research on what social media platforms "young people" actually use today, unless "young" on the islands means "under 40".
what a farce (Score:1)
This is about as concerned with children as the Thai banning pornhub. In reality, it comes to exposing corruption, or well, just exposing the royalty.
If ever you see another "save the children" move, remember those pushing for the ban are just trying to save themselves and their cushy positions of influence and corruption.