Take an example: What if filmed by a reporter?
Does it make a difference? How much?
What if the person claims whistleblowing of some type connected with the scene? Make a difference? Ridenour issue?
What about by a prominent journalist? Does it matter?
Is then a decision not to publish mainly an editorial one?
What if it is filtered for adults only like porn sites? Make a difference?
What other criteria could there be? Decency? That is long gone.
Privacy? Waived.
Think of others.
Public killings usually were once used to set a good exam;le for others.
Why not private illegal killings be used as bad examples, abhorent examples for the average person to see and learn from?
Not a good idea? Then maybe you don't trust the average person to be deterred thereby? Why not? Food for thought.
Pulling such material is certainly inconsistent with Facebook stockholders' vested interests.
Giving up voluntarily, for no return, such wildly profitable viral material surely must nag many of the holders of the stock...Zuckerberg, and his stockholders, stand to make killings on material like this!
Maybe they can start a stockholder rebellion against Zuckerberg's rule if this kind of shenanigans continues.
No comments:
Post a Comment