Nikki Haley Wants Identify Verification for use of Social Media

[Laodicean60]

Ok but all of this misinformation, in your opinion, was provided to you via the government i.e. Bush and the media.

IMO, media and the government are different wings of the same eagle.

But, that aside, you'd trust the same government that you think lied to you about WMD to tell you that they want your ID online for the reasons they give?

Interesting?

I don't trust my government at all. They and corporations have more information on me than I know of. As mentioned above foreign actors should be identified and for honest reporting by organizations, no one should be afraid to post information. I'm ignorant, what is an anonymous account? For every social media account I have I have to give them my information. To me, real hate speech is lies because lies do no one any good but the liar.
Let us agree to disagree. Be Blessed

 

[YorkieGal]

I don't trust my government at all. They and corporations have more information on me than I know of. As mentioned above foreign actors should be identified and for honest reporting by organizations, no one should be afraid to post information. I'm ignorant, what is an anonymous account? For every social media account I have I have to give them my information. To me, real hate speech is lies because lies do no one any good but the liar.
Let us agree to disagree. Be Blessed

Of course we can agree to disagree - no problem at all.

But, I just found it confusing that you say you don't trust your government but you'll happily concede your individual rights because that same government tells you that someone else is a threat. It didn't make sense so I needed clarification from you so I didn't make assumptions.

An anonymous account, by definition, protects one's online identity. Although we sign up for social media, we don't have to give our real names, dates of birth, location etc, etc. We can use false information to protect our identities.

Of course, as someone has already pointed out, we aren't completely anonymous as the government can already (illegally) out someone's identity, look into their search history, private messages etc using a variety of techniques. We could also be 'hacked' and have our information released. But, we have legal recourse against this, currently.

If we willingly sign that away in the interest of 'national security', we will have no recourse and everything we say online can be used against us by friends, family, jobs, government, neighbors etc.

 

[Hank77]

But Haley stated she didn't want US citizens to be anonymous. In fact, she said she wanted their individual names.

From the OP article:
Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley was asked to explain her earlier remarks about social media companies on Wednesday and said that while she didn't mind "anonymous American" free speech, she didn't support anonymous free speech for actors in Russia, Iran and China.

During an appearance on Fox News on Tuesday, Haley said every person on social media should be "verified by their name." Haley, who was fiercely criticized by fellow Republican candidates for the idea, joined the hosts of CNBC's "Squawk Box" on Wednesday and was asked to explain her comments after "heads exploded."

It could be when someone opens an account on social and they are verified by their name the company has that information but that doesn't mean their real name is visible to the public.

Now, at first, Haley was saying that the names should be visible but I think she backed off from going that far according to the article if I'm understanding of
she didn't mind "anonymous American" free speech, she didn't support anonymous free speech for actors in Russia, Iran and China, is correct.

 

[YorkieGal]

It could be when someone opens an account on social and they are verified by their name the company has that information but that doesn't mean their real name is visible to the public.

I understand and I still won't agree to it because I don't see the boogeyman in these countries just because the US says so.

There was a time in 2001 when this same script was used and I was younger then and fell for it.

Not today, Satan!

 

[Hank77]

The control and censorship of these are not coming from foreign accounts but by the USA which they admitted. One example below:-

Let's stay on topic.

Purchases transacted through a bank is not the same as making comments online

No, and I wasn't comparing those two things. I was addressing how your verified information is already online.

being obliged by the government to be allowed to voice an opinion or fact so long as you prove your identity to them for the reasons they state.

The government wouldn't be the one verifying your identity. That would be the social media company. When you get a new job the employer verifies your identity if they are obeying the law, not the government. The same for a bank or CC account, etc.

I don't like the idea of foreign actors, especially our enemies, being able to fake their IDs and pretend they are US citizens. I believe it's dangerous for the US.

 

[YorkieGal]

Let's stay on topic.

No, and I wasn't comparing those two things. I was addressing how your verified information is already online.

The government wouldn't be the one verifying your identity. That would be the social media company. When you get a new job the employer verifies your identity if they are obeying the law, not the government. The same for a bank or CC account, etc.

I don't like the idea of foreign actors, especially our enemies, being able to fake their IDs and pretend they are US citizens. I believe it's dangerous for the US.

It's my topic and I'm on it, thanks.

IMO, your examples between credit card information and social media identification required by the government is false equivalency.

You telling me that the government isn't the one verifying my identity doesn't make it true. Please refer to how the government colludes with social media using my previous link as provided or one you can find yourself using the internet. As a reminder, it is a member of the government who advised she wanted the details.

I understand your concerns. I don't share them. That's ok.

 

[wing2000]

Nikki Haley calls for name verification in social media profiles: "This is a national security threat"

She says anonymous accounts on social media and bots spreading misinformation are a national security threat.

www.cbsnews.com

Is this a good idea?

In my view, no. There are lots of people who make comments they wouldn't make in person, on this forum included, but do they need to be identified?

From your linked article:
On Wednesday, on CNBC's "Squawk Box," Haley clarified she was not asking for a ban on Americans posting anonymously on social media sites.

"I don't mind anonymous American people having free speech — what I don't like is anonymous Russians and Chinese and Iranians having free speech," Haley said.

Are we that soft that we can't just use the 'ignore' function if our virtual feelings get hurt?

Of course not.

So, what's the real aim of trying to push identity verification on social media?

Nikki claims it's for Russian/Chinese/Iranian bots but the US government has claimed national security crisis as a way to to suppress the rights of US citizens before e.g. Patriot Act.

Since we're all pretty anonymous here, I'm interested in this forums participant views.

The former U.N. ambassador blamed Russia, China, Iran and North Korea for spreading misinformation on social media that divides Americans.

"This is a national security threat," Haley said during a Tuesday morning appearance on the "Ruthless Podcast," where she first raised the idea of name verification on social media.

I agree with her that disinformation, spread by our enemies, is a national security threat. The last few years have demonstrated how easily people can be influenced by social media. I don't know if verfiied acconts is the solution though.....

 

[wing2000]

What about critical thinking skills? What does it matter what someone/AI you don't know says on social media about anything? Surely we can make decisions for ourselves or are we so hive minded we need the government to protect us from ourselves (despite saying it's to protect us from the RUSSIANS etc).

Many people (too many) are not capable of filtering information.

 

[YorkieGal]

From your linked article:
On Wednesday, on CNBC's "Squawk Box," Haley clarified she was not asking for a ban on Americans posting anonymously on social media sites.

"I don't mind anonymous American people having free speech — what I don't like is anonymous Russians and Chinese and Iranians having free speech," Haley said.



The former U.N. ambassador blamed Russia, China, Iran and North Korea for spreading misinformation on social media that divides Americans.

"This is a national security threat," Haley said during a Tuesday morning appearance on the "Ruthless Podcast," where she first raised the idea of name verification on social media.

I agree with her that disinformation, spread by our enemies, is a national security threat. The last few years have demonstrated how easily people can be influenced by social media. I don't know if verfiied acconts is the solution though.....

Yes, she did have to clarify since what she said initially didn't match what she said in this link.

I have to wonder why she walked back her original statement.

Nikki Haley walks back her demand that social media ban anonymous posters after backlash

Nikki Haley says anonymity online poses a "national security threat." The GOP presidential contender Tuesday called for user verification and said social media networks should reveal their algorithms.

www.pbs.org

I'm more concerned about the disinformation spread by the US government who hide behind the guise of foreign enemies but it appears I may be a minority on this point!

Interesting! Not sure I wanted to know this but here we are now!

 

[wing2000]

I don't have Facebook or any social media.

You have an account here don't you? That is social media.

 

[YorkieGal]

You have an account here don't you? That is social media.

Yes, I do and I didn't consider it social media. I guess definitions vary.

Are Forums "Social Media" Sites?

Before reading on, would you consider forums "social media?" This is the question that is posed on a High Rankings Forum post. Many people find that the answer varies. Forums, after all, are inherently social -- they bring people...

www.seroundtable.com

 

[JustOneWay]

Yes, I do and I didn't consider it social media. I guess definitions vary.

Are Forums "Social Media" Sites?

Before reading on, would you consider forums "social media?" This is the question that is posed on a High Rankings Forum post. Many people find that the answer varies. Forums, after all, are inherently social -- they bring people...

www.seroundtable.com

Social Media:

websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking.

: forms of electronic communication (such as websites for social networking and microblogging) through which users create online communities to share information, ideas, personal messages, and other content (such as videos)

This is social media.

 

[YorkieGal]

Social Media:

websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking.

: forms of electronic communication (such as websites for social networking and microblogging) through which users create online communities to share information, ideas, personal messages, and other content (such as videos)

This is social media.

Thanks, differing opinions have been noted and acknowledged.

 

[JustOneWay]

Thanks, differing opinions have been noted and acknowledged.

Do you want the dictionary banned because it doesn't give you the definitions you want? LOL

This is social media regardless of your thought about it.

 

[YorkieGal]

Do you want the dictionary banned because it doesn't give you the definitions you want? LOL

This is social media regardless of your thought about it.

Did you not read the link which showed that others do not view forums as social media? This wasn't just my view or opinion and it helped inform another person of why I had that view, initially?

Opinions are opinions regardless of what you think about it.

Oh and LOL.

 

[JustOneWay]

Did you not read the link which showed that others do not view forums as social media? This wasn't just my view or opinion and it helped inform another person of why I had that view, initially?

Opinions are opinions regardless of what you think about it.

Oh and LOL.

Some people believe the world is flat. They are just as wrong as those believe a forum is not part of social media.

How does it feel to be a part of a social media platform?

 

[YorkieGal]

Some people believe the world is flat. They are just as wrong as those believe a forum is not part of social media.

How does it feel to be a part of a social media platform?

Better now that you're silenced. All the best!

 

[JustOneWay]

Better now that you're silenced. All the best!

I am glad. I am not sure I want to converse with people who reject definitions.

BTW, you did not silence me.... I would provide a definition to prove it but it would be dismissed.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

I think everyone who thinks Haley's idea is a good one should read Orwell's 1984. The complete audio book is on Youtube, but here is a short analysis.

 

[JustOneWay]

Social Media.
: forms of electronic communication (such as websites for social networking and microblogging) through which users create online communities to share information, ideas, personal messages, and other content (such as videos)

Looking at Christian Forums, I see a place for folks to blog, people sharing information, personal messages and videos!

We are on a social media platform