My, My, Facebook Gives In
Filed under: Armenians, Europe, History, Turks, Website, World War I — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on December 11, 2007 @ 2:32 pm CET
A couple of days ago I published a post blasting the popular website Facebook for stifling debate (in this case about the so-called Armenian genocide). Facebook shut down two popular (pro-)Turkish websites in one week time: one called “The Greatest Leader of ALL Time: Atatürk,” the other called “The Armenian Genocide is a Huge Lie.”
Now, whether one agrees that it’s a ‘lie’ - or better, whether what happened constitutes genocide - or not, stifling debate is seldom the right course of action. There are cases in which it is - such as terrorism - but this issue deals with history, it was and is about historical events, about which a debate exists. Historians disagree with each other about this issue, with, as Professor Norman Stone pointed out in a column he wrote a couple of weeks ago, most ‘heavy’ historians (and who are experts in Ottoman and Turkish history) agreeing with the Turks that what happened wasn’t genocide and that it has to be pointed out, on the other hand, that Armenians themselves were busily carrying out some ethnic cleansing of their own, which is often forgotten in the West.
Back to Facebook: after having received what probably amounts to thousands of e-mails in the last couple of days, Facebook has decided to put the group about the events that took place during World War I back up. The Atatürk group was put up earlier already (shortly after it had been taken down).
For this, Facebook has to be commended.
Having said that, it should never have taken the group(s) down in the first place. Some Armenian pressure groups might try to stifle the debate about this issue, but a major Western - American - website should not let people silence other people, especially not on a controversial issue such as this. If there was a lot of hatred going on in this group, that would be one thing, but the hatred wasn’t coming from Turks. It was coming from some angry Armenian commentators.
1 Dean
December 11, 2007 @ 5:23 pm CETLol, its ok to stifle debate about terrorism? Where did that come from? What could possibly be more relevant, urgent, and controversial than terrorism and our response to it in today’s world?
Unless…duh…if the R’s didn’t have the scary brown people to threaten the country and Congress with (see FISA reform, 2007 US Congress August Recess, and its lead up), how could they possibly get anything done? That must be it. Lol
2 Michael van der Galien
December 11, 2007 @ 5:32 pm CETDid you even read the article or what?
Point is that there was no hatred going on, no racism, no glorification of terrorism, just debate about a controversial issue. In other words, it shouldn’t have been closed down.
3 Dean
December 11, 2007 @ 5:41 pm CETNo no, I get that. It was a good point, and I agree that debate shouldn’t be closed down at all. That includes debate about terrorism, don’t you think?
4 Michael van der Galien
December 11, 2007 @ 6:00 pm CETNo, I disagree. If there was a pro-Al Qaeda Facebook group, Facebook should close it down for instance.
5 Dean
December 11, 2007 @ 6:25 pm CET"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable." - Dr. M.L. King
Debate, discussion, discourse. These are the peaceful revolutions, and if we as a country had maybe listened to the people we were manipulating and exploiting in the Middle East, the violent revolution they are trying to create wouldn’t exist.
And if their statements and ideas are as hateful and wrongheaded as I’m sure you would correctly argue, then the worst that could happen is they are exposed for the ignorant bigots they are in the course of an intelligent dialog.
I cannot agree that silencing unpopular speech is the "right course of action" to take against any group who feels already ignored and abused, however misled they may be.
6 Lazlee
December 12, 2007 @ 10:07 am CETDan, I think the distinction is this. Discussing or protesting unfair conditions or injustices is one thing. However, openly advocating the violent action of a group that murders people is another. The former is acceptable and to be encouraged, the latter is reprehensible and promotes nothing of societal value.
Yes, Facebook is to be commended for remedying its error. However, Facebook should not allow its complaint mechanisms to be used to silence people or groups that are not violating Facebook’s terms of use just because someone doesn’t like what they say or who they are. In fact, using Facebook to do that should be a violation of its terms of use, if it isn’t already.
7 Zane
December 13, 2007 @ 4:36 am CETAh, but equally qualified Armenian historians on Ottoman History, of which there are many, are to be immediately discounted by dint of the fact that they’re Armenian, eh? This biased statement of ‘heavy historians,’ is equivalent to a stacked deck of cards.