Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Facebook

Facebook Says Users Can't Post Calls To Assassinate Putin (bloomberg.com) 127

Posted by msmash from the how-about-that dept.
Facebook parent Meta Platforms clarified on Sunday that it is against the company's user rules to share a post that "calls for the death of a head of state" -- likely a reference to Russian President Vladimir Putin. From a report: Last week, Facebook temporarily relaxed its policies so that Ukrainian users could post threats of violence against the Russian military, which invaded its neighbor in late February. The change led to some public confusion as to what was allowed, and what was not, on Facebook and Instagram. Meta's President of Global Affairs Nick Clegg posted a statement Friday saying the move is aimed at protecting Ukrainian rights and doesn't signal tolerance for "discrimination, harassment or violence towards Russians." On Sunday, he tried to further explain the company's stance to employees in an internal post. "We are now narrowing the focus to make it explicitly clear in the guidance that it is never to be interpreted as condoning violence against Russians in general," Clegg wrote in the internal post, which was reviewed by Bloomberg.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Facebook Says Users Can't Post Calls To Assassinate Putin More

Facebook Says Users Can't Post Calls To Assassinate Putin

Comments Filter:
  • You can post a threat of violence against the military but not Putin? Isn't Putin the head of the military?

    • Re: So... (Score:2)

      by jd ( 1658 )

      Good question on whether he is. Not all heads of state are, and I'm not sure how the Russian system works. TBF, I'm not sure Putin does, either, he seems to make stuff up as he goes along.

      • Whether or not that's a formal position or title, this is clearly his doing and he's the one ultimately calling the shots.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Moryath ( 553296 )

        TBF, I'm not sure Putin does, either, he seems to make stuff up as he goes along.

        He's literally a tin-pot dictator. Russia has fallen to the status of Banana Republic.

      • When you are a puppet master pulling all the strings of your puppets, it becomes difficult to remember all the titles you are running the show for.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by skipkent ( 1510 )

        I wonder how much of this is the USAs fault for drafting parts of the Russian Constitution, Part I of the Russian Civil Code, and the Russian Tax Code

        • Probably not much, since they removed term limits in order to allow Putin to basically be dictator for life with perfunctory sham elections every once in a while. Previous to that, he had to simply be "Prime Minister" and let a fully-owned puppet (Medvedev) play President for a term until he was allowed to come back and get rid of that nuisance of a law.

          What's to say they haven't cast aside any other inconvenient legal structures in order to empower autocrat petrocunt dictatorial rule?

        • There was some USAID assistance to the constitution process but only a minor part. It bears more resemblance to the French style of constitution but was mostly a creation by native Russians. However note that Putin is in power today only because this constution was *amended* several times to allow him to stay in power. The original text did not allow a president to serve this many terms.

          Any constitution can be abused. Such a document only holds up to the extent that the government (including judges) and

        • I wonder how much of this is the USAs fault for drafting parts of the Russian Constitution, Part I of the Russian Civil Code, and the Russian Tax Code

          Please cite some reference for this extraordinary claim, even a Wikipedia article would do. I do understand the US was influential or even responsible for the drafting of the constitution of several countries, notably Japan and West Germany. But this is the first time I've heard that the US had anything to do with the Russian constitution, besides perhaps acting as role models or consultants. The Russian presidency is actually closer to the French model than to the US one.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by skipkent ( 1510 )

            https://www.usaid.gov/news-inf... [usaid.gov]

            "USAID-funded Rule of Law implementers helped draft the Russian Constitution, Part I of the Russian Civil Code, and the Russian Tax Code."

            "As a world-wide movement for open government has developed, USAID has supported civic watchdog groups in Russia that have provided non-partisan oversight over electoral processes including through innovative uses of technology."

            For someone like Putin, who watched his glorious Soviet Union fall, only to be reborn partially through the will

            • "USAID-funded Rule of Law implementers helped draft the Russian Constitution, Part I of the Russian Civil Code, and the Russian Tax Code."

              This is a pretty vague claim with no details as to who these "implementers" are. Are they in fact a single group or just various individuals who received, for example, study grants in US law and then later became involved with the writing of the Russian constitution?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by jd ( 1658 )

          Seriously, I doubt the Russian Constitution was a significant element. Now, Reagan undermining Gorbachev's reforms and backing the insurrection by the dictator Yeltsin, THAT probably had quite a lot of impact. But that was not strictly the US' action, that was very specifically Reagan's idea, to undermine the gradual introduction of democracy and freedom in Russia.

          (Gorbachev is no saint, by any means, and he would not have solved all, or even many, of the problems in Russia had he been backed and supported

      • Putin *is* the Russian system a the moment. The technicalities of the government structure are somewhat irrelevant when everything Putin wants is rubber stamped by his pre-approved Duma members. This is not just an authoritarian government, it is a full blown dictatorship. Remember, even Hitler was elected democratically and after this he turned the state into a dictatorship through both legal and extra-legal means. Exactly what Putin has done.

        Putin is extremely wealthy, incredibly so. And he did not g

        • Putin *was* the Russian system. The Ukrainians showed the world that it's a lot easier to make him bleed than anyone thought. He's still dangerous, like a wounded T-Rex, but all the other predators now know they have a chance, and he's outnumbered. It's the biggest drawback of ruling with fear. There's a limit to how many people he can take out who call his bluff if they do it at the same time. He's preoccupied and overextended and everyone knows it. I doubt the new top dog will be very nice, but will

    • Maybe you have to carefully word your requests. Posts like "Two million to the person that brings me Putins head on a silver platter" might be frowned upon whereas "It would be a terrible loss globally should Putin come down with a sudden case of decapitation." might be deemed as acceptable speech.

      • Maybe you have to carefully word your requests. Posts like "Two million to the person that brings me Putins head on a silver platter" might be frowned upon whereas "It would be a terrible loss globally should Putin come down with a sudden case of decapitation." might be deemed as acceptable speech.

        Won't someone rid me of this troublesome Putin!

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dgatwood ( 11270 )

          Someone should really invite Putin to visit a maternity ward in Ukraine during the next bombing campaign.

        • Emojis. You've to say it with emojis, the complex nuanced language developed by Zuck.

          Does meta mgmt have nothing else to do than make up zero utility braindead policies for FB IG etc ? How does it matter what anyone says or if FB likes it or not ?
          No ones going to do any killing bcoz of FB.
          Cartoons.

          TBH the UN is sorta in the same boat what with the accused nation allowed to veto and all.

    • You can post a threat of violence against the military but not Putin? Isn't Putin the head of the military?

      There's two main reasons why calls for assassination are generally frowned upon:

      1) Given the degree of instability an assassination causes, both in the immediate aftermath, but also in the security clampdowns as other leaders try to avoid the same fate, it's not really a tool you want used very often. Sure Putin is an unbelievably nasty guy and it probably (not for certain) makes the world better in that one case, but once you start talking assassination for him you're encouraging the yahoo's who think a ma

      • 3) (Most important) Heads of state don't want to make a habit of their own kind getting killed.

    • You can post a threat of violence against the military but not Putin? Isn't Putin the head of the military?

      Bett yet, Putin can literally have your whole family bombed into shit, but you can't say that someone should shoot him in his stupid face.

    • Putin is Russia's head of state. Targeting him would be an assassination and is considered a violation of International Law. As much as the free world would like to see Putin go, there is a right way and wrong way to stop war crimes in Ukraine.

      A quick read of UN Rules and the Geneva convention (https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/war-crimes.shtml) make a very strong case of many examples of war crimes. Because there is a consistent ongoing pattern, e.g. targeting civilians, it is obvious this strateg

      • Russia's permanent membership in the UN blocks any meaningful action. There should be a mechanism for the revocation for permanent member status.

        I'm assuming you're referring to Russia's permanent UN Security Council membership. There's an intriguing idea that Russia has never actually been a permanent member. The seat they're currently sitting in belonged to the USSR. When the USSR split the Russians sorta just assumed that they get the seat by default and everyone went with it to avoid a bit diplomatic spat at a tense time, but technically there isn't any legal justification behind Russia inheriting the seat.

  • They'll let people plot insurrections and genocide on their service just fine. Until they get caught letting it happen, at least.

    • It's all about getting caught, and we all know it.

    • People participating in echo chambers generally don't narc on each other, and Facebook's automatic content flagging system is a joke. Thing is, this isn't unique to Facebook. Reddit has a huge piracy problem, and Slickdeals regularly has people posting schemes that are basically retail fraud. If you don't have enough moderation, people break the rules - that's just how it goes on the internet.

      • If you don't have enough moderation, people break the rules - that's just how it goes on the internet.

        If you don't have enough enforcement, some people will break the rules - that's just how it goes in general.

        For instance: Look how the combination of defunding police, decriminalizing "small" robberies, assaults, and other crimes, with heavily enforcing civilian disarmament and prosecuting self-defense violence as if it were initiated violence has worked out for crime and murder rates.

        Or how non-use of any

    • Killing an entire subjugated class of people is A-OK in Facebook land. Killing an individual is apparently still considered bad. Not sure what actual number of individuals need to be targeted before they consider it alright, but apparently the number is north of one.

  • If we shoot Putin then we'll also have to shoot the next American president who invades a country.

    Not that I'm against that, I'm just pointing it out.

    • I usually am in favor of rubbing Americans in their own country's.... bad decisions. But even Trump would not target civilians... to this extent.
      Anyway killing Putin will only make him a hero. Banish him to a country far away of Russian influence. Let him do some community service, ...
      • Put him on the ISS for a year or so...

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by hAckz0r ( 989977 )

        But even Trump would not target civilians...

        Then I suppose that police tear gas is just a way of celebrating with the "civilians" in the streets? As a rule he targeted whoever was useful at the time but he just left it up to his followers to choose the actual weapons. The man has zero empathy for anyone, just like Putin.

      • > Trump would not target civilians... to this extent

        Eh?

        When COVID was at its worst, he tried to withhold vaccine supplies to California... a state with a population of 39 million... to only 327,000 doses (That's *doses* not people, so if he had his way only 163500 Californians would have been safe.) because we had the temerity not to vote for the gibbering shitgibbon (twice). Granted, trying to off someone by withholding medicine and treatment is not so direct as just having them shot. But that's still

    • Then people argue about what "invade" means. Even Trump "invaded" by some definitions. I'd be happy if we just settle for having congress approve wars again before we engage in them.

  • I can't post irresponsible calls for ass-ass-ination of Putty-Boy on Facebook!

    Maybe Slashdot can BAIL me out! :P

  • just white list Putin and Russia from any blocklist

  • Use their terminology :)
  • On this website: https://www.genolve.com/svg/en... [genolve.com] You have to wait about 10 seconds till the animation plays out.

  • Sigh... (Score:3)

    by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Monday March 14, 2022 @12:59PM (#62356659) Journal

    In a civilized society, we shouldn't be calling for anyone's assassination.

    Besides, as with all the plots to assassinate Hitler in WWII, the question always remains: Will it accomplish what we want? Any external power assassinating Putin might actually make things worse. It might in fact strengthen the Russian war hawks' hand. There's no guarantee that Putin's death would just somehow magically mean the new President would come bearing an olive branch, he might even be worse.

    Let's keep in mind the ancient lesson; the assassination of Julius Caesar didn't lead to the restoration of the Roman Republic, as the plotters had hoped, but rather to a new period of political instability and civil war that ended up with Caesar's nephew, Octavius, centralizing political and military power after defeating his former ally; Mark Antony, The Roman Republic was effectively terminated, its already faltering institutions simply kept as a formality, while Octavius transformed himself into Augustus Caesar, not building his reign on the shattered corpse of the Republic, but rather on the by-then hallowed bones of his uncle. In fact, the plotters accomplished the exact opposite of what they intended, and simply delivered complete autocratic power into the hands of another Julian; surely one of the cruelest ironies in recorded history.

    • Maybe we shouldn't assassinate Putin, but a civilized society should put the debate and discussion open like what you are doing here, not banning people from speaking out their heart.

      Here I assume you are not asking Ukraine to surrender. Now what options do we have if Putin don't give up the war and start using chemical or biological weapon? Economic sanction is unlikely enough to overthrow a dictator if his territory is big enough and population is large enough.

      • First of all, it's pretty damned clear that Putin has to a large extent assassin-proofed himself. It's not even clear how you would kill the guy, even if you wanted to. Even if he violates ever rule of war, it still doesn't mean in practical terms we can get to him. But even if we did somehow figure out how to take him out, I argue that it's a dangerous assumption to insist that if he's in a body bag, that the people that take over will just put up their hands and go "Okay, we're pulling out." It might not

        • I don't expect an external force to whack putin. I expect an oligarch who's son/daughter is angry about no internet to.

          • And it's my operating thesis that the Oligarchs don't wield the kind of power that many seem to think they do. As I say in another post, there's this idea floating around that Putin lives or dies by the Oligarchs and the other senior members of his political support network, but I'd argue that Putin doesn't owe them very much, and they owe Putin just about everything. It's the Army that counts, not the Oligarchs. Putin is no fool, so I'm sure he would expect some of the Oligarchs to start scheming, and they

            • I've no idea what really goes on in putin's life. My expectation is he "parties"/hangs with the rich entitled like him. A weekend on someone's yacht or castle. And at dinner, some poison. I expect he is being super careful, but he may slip up. He may have someone he even thinks is a friend. Except the friend is not. As I say, I've no idea what putin does in the evenings/weekends, but if he is hanging with the oligarchs, one may slip him a mickey. I would not expect the army to whack him. But as I say, all c

              • The general impression among the "experts" is that Putin is in fact quite isolated at this point, perhaps in part because he doesn't trust his old entourage. If that's the case he has likely assassination-proofed himself, limiting himself to a small group of trusted insiders. I think pinning hopes on assassination is a pretty false hope myself. This is a man that has spent a long time at the pinnacle of power, and you don't accomplish that without reading people very well.

                • Have you seen the weird ass pictures where his generals and advisors have to sit 20 meters away from him?

                  Shit's weird over in the Tsar's Palace.
    • Eventually they tried to kill hitler. If only it had not been so damn hot that day. Though even the attempt still had an effect on the outcome of the war.

      • There was more than one attempt to assassinate Hitler. The plotters even got a bomb on his airplane, but the cold temperatures in the hold meant the fuse didn't work correctly. Hitler was one goddamned lucky guy, and in the end he did himself in.

    • Well, Trump had an Iranian general assassinated, and he didn't even deny it (which is a change of pace). So the groundwork is laid.

      But the point is made. We got rid of Saddam Hussein and we did not see democracy magically spring into life.

      If Putin withdraws then the problem will resolve itself eventually as Putin is up there in years. There will be chaos when he dies; there is no normal successor planned, the government is weak and relies totally upon Putin. Republics will want to break away, which is w

      • Putin isn't nearly as popular as he was a decade ago, and the invasion of Ukraine may in fact have one of the simplest of all explanations; a ruler of a semi-democracy who for many years enjoyed the support of most of his people, is now aging (maybe even sick), is seeing his popularity slide, and risks being taken out by more mundane means like competing ambitious lieutenants deciding to retire him to a nice Dacha (like Brezhnev did to Khrushchev, and the "Gang of Eight" tried to do to Gorbachev). So what's

      • Well, Trump had an Iranian general assassinated, and he didn't even deny it (which is a change of pace). So the groundwork is laid.

        Groundwork? Might makes right is an observation, not instructions. Everyone knows it works, it doesn't mean you should do it.

    • In a civilized society, we shouldn't be calling for anyone's assassination.

      Bullshit. There is no harm at all in calling for the death of someone who is actively causing other people to die for no reason. None. There's no moral high ground in pretending that Putin's life is as valuable as my own.

      • Unfortunately his life is worth infinitely more than yours. It shouldn't be that way, but it is.
        The fact is, he's the head of a crumbling state armed with ICBMs. I'd sigh your death warrant a thousand times over before I let someone assassinate that tin-pot fuckstick dictator. And it sucks.

        • What you seem to be saying - correct me if I'm wrong - is that Putin's life has value because his death might start WW3.

          What about the fact that he himself might start WW3, and his successor might not?

          I believe all lives have value, but that those who commit mass murder force us to choose between theirs and those whom they have murdered and/or likely will in the future. In that case I choose to try to protect the lives of the many over those of the few.

          But for the same reason, I would try to protect the bi

          • What you seem to be saying - correct me if I'm wrong - is that Putin's life has value because his death might start WW3.

            Sadly, yes.

            What about the fact that he himself might start WW3, and his successor might not?

            He might. But I consider that possibility much smaller. He's going to commit a lot of evil, but I don't think he's gonna push for a war that he will lose spectacularly.
            Even in the full-scale nuclear scenario, no matter how you swing it, America comes out on top (even if that's the top of a pile of ashes)

            I believe all lives have value, but that those who commit mass murder force us to choose between theirs and those whom they have murdered and/or likely will in the future. In that case I choose to try to protect the lives of the many over those of the few.

            So do I. And unfortunately, in terms of the "the needs of the many, vs the needs of the new", I think assassinating Putin has a higher potential of causing much more loss of life.

            But for the same reason, I would try to protect the billions who might otherwise die in a nuclear world war, over the much smaller number, though still far too high, number who might die if we try to ensure that the current conflict escalates no further.

            I couldn't agree

    • Your argument is self answered - "In a civilized society".... this isn't (the US anyway, I'll let you speak for Canada), nor is most of the world. We live in what Sheldon Wolin labeled as inverted totalitarianism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] . In quest for the primacy of profit, corporate oligarchs make all the rules.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by khchung ( 462899 )

      In a civilized society, we shouldn't be calling for anyone's assassination.

      Totally agree.

      Besides, as with all the plots to assassinate Hitler in WWII, the question always remains: Will it accomplish what we want?

      You gave those people too much credit. Often, when people call out for violence, they just want the instant satisfaction of seeing someone they hated being hurt or killed, they never think about anything after that. People in hatred is most easily manipulated, hence all the hate being spread by the media.

  • Tell this to thousands of Ukrainian refugees in my city.

    • Putin is the 21st Century Hitler. The surprising thing to me is that some 52% of Russians support his invasion. How is that possible? The man is a butcher and using the same tactics and excuses the Nazi's did last century.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Calydor ( 739835 )

        I don't trust any of the polls in Russia right now. Not that I trusted them before, but I have absolutely zero trust in them now. People will lie to avoid getting disappeared, and there's no guarantee the numbers shown reflect anything said to the pollsters - nor any guarantee that anyone was asked at all.

      • Plenty of Germans supported Hitler too, until the bombs started falling on Germany. That's why every modern dictator's first move is to take control of the media and impose severe penalties on communicating unapproved information - the propaganda is how they retain power and not end up having a small bit of metal being propelled at their face at high velocities.

      • Putin is the 21st Century Hitler. The surprising thing to me is that some 52% of Russians support his invasion. How is that possible? The man is a butcher and using the same tactics and excuses the Nazi's did last century.

        The reason it's possible is because the world is overrun with easily controlled fools and cowards.

      • The surprising thing to me is that some 52% of Russians support his invasion.

        They don't know what is happening. They think it's Ukraine's fault for not instituting the Minsk agreements. They don't see pictures of apartment buildings being destroyed, they see pictures of Russian soldiers doing heroic things.

        Then like most of us, they wonder what is for dinner or go to work.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by iamacat ( 583406 )

        Putin is the 21st Century Hitler

        I can say that it's a lousy analogy without it being any credit to Putin. Russia is a besieged fading power with ample living space and no need to conquer more. In fact, vast parts of territory are virtually abandoned due to demographic collapse. Russia's sphere of influence has been shrinking for decades, aided by the West through means of varying morality.

        Putin's fear is that before long, Russia or parts of Russia will undergo it's own Color revolution at his expense. He is probably right. It's just that

      • Hitler was very popular in Germany. You would be surprised what people would agree to when they are fed lies and effective propaganda. As much as I think that there are massive flagrant violations of International law and an astounding volume of war crimes, Putin hasn't fired up gas chambers and executed millions of innocents, yet.

        IMHO, there should be a UN resolution demanding an immediate cease fire and enforcement with UN peacekeeping forces with neutral status, e.g. China and India on the ground direc

    • Be careful, there's a big market in fake Ukrainian passports in Russia. There's so much free money being thrown around in the EU for refugees that every Russian now wants to be Ukrainian. It sure beats saving a few paychecks to put a down payment on a loaf of bread.

  • People should just post that Putin needs a special lifesaving surgery. Sure, it's saving the lives of other people in exchange for his own but it is still a lifesaving surgery.

  • Can I call for him to be prosecuted as a war criminal, convicted, and executed? I am not sure if he is channeling Stalin or Hitler, although he reminds me more of Mussolini, but he is a war criminal regardless.

    • Can I call for him to be prosecuted as a war criminal, convicted, and executed? I am not sure if he is channeling Stalin or Hitler, although he reminds me more of Mussolini, but he is a war criminal regardless.

      Here's your guide to World War II 2.0.
      Starring in the role of Adolf Hitler we have Vladimir Putin.
      Starring in the role of Hitler's incompetent friend Benito Mussolini we have Alexander Lukashenko.
      And finally, starring in the role of Tojo Hideki, we have Xi Jinping.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by chthon ( 580889 )

        That is also what I thought already for more than a couple of years.

        Just like Mussolini needed help from Hitler in Greece and North Africa, Lukashenko and Assad needed Putin.

        But I didn't make the connection about Xi Jinping.

        Besides, the Japanese occupation of Manchuria was also a humanitarian mission.

    • Stalin... definitely Stalin. Remember the hard-on Putin has for his "good old days" of the GGB and Soviet Union; and his statements to the effect that their dissolution was the "greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century." Stalin even got his rocks off on slaughtering Ukrainians too.

    • I got in plenty of trouble on Fakebook for suggesting this to be true of *many* of those in power. That many were guilty, by their own admission, of crimes against humanity, and that those people needed to be tried and punished if there were to be any hope of those crimes to stop.

      People saying the same sorts of things, and worse, against people of a slightly different political persuasion got a free pass 100.0% of the time.

      In reality, I do not advocate for assassination if there is ANY other way to protect

  • Glad they were able to remedy this so "quickly"!

  • People are just suggesting that someone give him a Special Political Hug. He's been so tense these days....
  • Not assassination,
    Special Justice Operation to bring peace to Europe.

  • US military had most wanted playing cards [dailymail.co.uk] featuring Saddam Hussein as ace of spades. The Interview [imdb.com] featured assassination of Kim John Un, even though US and North Korea have not been at war for decades.

    Killing enemy leaders is not only the most normal thing for people to talk about when said enemy is attacking their homes but their patriotic duty if opportunity ever presents itself. If Meta can't handle the heat fine, but they are then discrediting themselves as a digital equivalent of public square and sho

Slashdot Top Deals

Keep up the good work! But please don't ask me to help.

Close