Jump to content

Father murders his baby daughter on Facebook Live


webfact

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

 

Earlier in the day, the Public Health Ministry had urged the online social-media giant to remove the video from the Internet.

Really?

 

Because  the BBC Is saying it was not taken down until the BBC reported it to FB. 

 

Likewise YouTube has confirmed it took the video down after the BBC reported it. 

 

Over 2,300 ghouls watched it before that without reporting it. 

Edited by Bluespunk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 104
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

9 hours ago, thequietman said:

Once a face is put to the name, it really strikes home. It brought tears to my face.

Why are we so cruel ?

 

Heartbreaking.

This has nothing to do with cruelty it has everything to do with alcohol  A serious problem here in Thailand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Im sure that is more to do with just money .

To stop any offensive videos getting posted, you would have to post a video to FB, they watch it and then decide whether you can post it or not .

    That would take a huge logistical effort and it would make posters uncomfortable about having to have their posts approved, before they show up and it would be a slippery slope to go down , FB could end up with Chinese style censorship , all for the sake of stopping the occasional offensive video from being uploaded .

   There is already a "report" button, it isnt full proof, but its the best that can be done 

  Mass screening and censorship of millions of videos isnt the answer to a few rouge videos

The owners take the money, so it becomes their responsibility for the service they provide. Do you think facebook is a voluntary organisation run on a charitable basis solely for the benefits of the idiots that fuel the social media with all the crap they upload onto there?

 

What would happen here on TV, if they gave all posters a free hand to post anything they like and then deny all responsibility and only take certain posts down if reported. On TV, the owners are responsible for what is published on the forums under the law. So why not the same with facebook? If not viable, then take it out of action. Not possible to have their cake and eat it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, cyberfarang said:

 

 

What would happen here on TV, if they gave all posters a free hand to post anything they like and then deny all responsibility and only take certain posts down if reported. On TV, the owners are responsible for what is published on the forums under the law. So why not the same with facebook? If not viable, then take it out of action. Not possible to have their cake and eat it.

 

 

We can actually post anything we like here on TV, but like FB, if its deemed to be inappropriate, it will be removed and the poster may face a ban  , and as far as Im aware, TV will not be held responsible for anything thats posted on the forums, as long as anything offensive is removed promptly

   There are report buttons on TV, just like there are on FB

TVs moderation may differ slightly to FB's, thats because TV is Thailand based and would have to comply with Thai laws, rules and regulations.

    FB doesnt have to do that .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I hate FB and it's news monopoly I will fight for people right to publish whatever they wish to show.

There will always have to be right to say and publish whatever anyone wishes to do so. Thats our real freedom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, oilinki said:

While I hate FB and it's news monopoly I will fight for people right to publish whatever they wish to show.

There will always have to be right to say and publish whatever anyone wishes to do so. Thats our real freedom.

Does that mean photos and videos of people being murdered, raped, beaten up or tortured is perfectly acceptable? For example if your daughter was gang raped and the footage posted all over the media, would you think; that`s OK it`s everyone`s right to have freedom to publish? Thought not. How far do you think the boundaries of social media freedom should be pushed?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, oilinki said:

While I hate FB and it's news monopoly I will fight for people right to publish whatever they wish to show.

There will always have to be right to say and publish whatever anyone wishes to do so. Thats our real freedom.

I have some sympathy for that view so far as it involves "news", but it begs the question "what constitutes news?"....and how far do we go in giving platforms to psychos to peddle and promote their sick fantasies. That debate raged over the execution video of Daniel Pearl (followed by others) about 15 years ago.

As for being free....these companies at the forefront of personal freedoms and choices....Google, Facebook, Apple, Yahoo, Amazon, Twitters, many others....are just about the ultimate controlling, spying, sly, deceitful, duplicitous, slimy, invasive creeps imaginable: they know every aspect of the lives of a vast number of people on the planet: our health, habits, preferences, finances, residences, travel, diet, personal circumstances, families, political views, alcohol consumption, internet history, car model, licences, criminal history, drug use, etc, etc.

Their only interest in freedom is their own freedom to gather data in order to make a profit. Orwellian "freedom".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, cyberfarang said:

Does that mean photos and videos of people being murdered, raped, beaten up or tortured is perfectly acceptable? For example if your daughter was gang raped and the footage posted all over the media, would you think; that`s OK it`s everyone`s right to have freedom to publish? Thought not. How far do you think the boundaries of social media freedom should be pushed?

 

 

Good question. I can only give generic answers. If I had daughter who'd be raped, my reaction would be different.

 

I mean we have to fight for the freedom to publish live events. This time it was something horrible which should not be published nor watched by others. 

 

Next time might be something horrible again, but in that time it's abuse of power by someone in control. In that case we need the live feed for evidence and for support.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Prbkk said:

I have some sympathy for that view so far as it involves "news", but it begs the question "what constitutes news?"....and how far do we go in giving platforms to psychos to peddle and promote their sick fantasies. That debate raged over the execution video of Daniel Pearl (followed by others) about 15 years ago.

As for being free....these companies at the forefront of personal freedoms and choices....Google, Facebook, Apple, Yahoo, Amazon, Twitters, many others....are just about the ultimate controlling, spying, sly, deceitful, duplicitous, slimy, invasive creeps imaginable: they know every aspect of the lives of a vast number of people on the planet: our health, habits, preferences, finances, residences, travel, diet, personal circumstances, families, political views, alcohol consumption, internet history, car model, licences, criminal history, drug use, etc, etc.

Their only interest in freedom is their own freedom to gather data in order to make a profit. Orwellian "freedom".

I think freedom always come with responsibility. 

I'm not happy what constitutes 'news' in today's world, but I guess I just have to get used to it.

 

At least today's technology gives possibilities to filter silly news from real news

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, oilinki said:

Good question. I can only give generic answers. If I had daughter who'd be raped, my reaction would be different.

 

I mean we have to fight for the freedom to publish live events. This time it was something horrible which should not be published nor watched by others. 

 

Next time might be something horrible again, but in that time it's abuse of power by someone in control. In that case we need the live feed for evidence and for support.

 

Your answer is a complete contradiction. So it`s OK for the humiliation or abuse of others to be filmed and uploaded onto the social media as long as it`s not personal to you. Sorry, your argument bears no logic.

 

You say; This time it was something horrible which should not be published nor watched by others. So in that case, who should be held accountable for it? Those that provide the tools for these horrific videos to be shared with the public or those who upload them? My answer to this, is that all videos and photos uploaded onto facebook should have to be approved and moderated. If not viable, then place facebook on hold until they come up with a means to do so.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, cyberfarang said:

Your answer is a complete contradiction. So it`s OK for the humiliation or abuse of others to be filmed and uploaded onto the social media as long as it`s not personal to you. Sorry, your argument bears no logic.

 

You say; This time it was something horrible which should not be published nor watched by others. So in that case, who should be held accountable for it? Those that provide the tools for these horrific videos to be shared with the public or those who upload them? My answer to this, is that all videos and photos uploaded onto facebook should have to be approved and moderated. If not viable, then place facebook on hold until they come up with a means to do so.

No. It's not OK to humiliate. It's not ok to kill children. It's not ok to get kicks out of watching people being killed.

 

The problem is in society level, not on media level, which the video was broadcasted on.

Fix the root cause so that these events never happen. Don't blame the messenger. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Minnie the Minx said:

Big difference between reading a news item and watching live a murder don't you think? 

Yes, but it is not the fault of social media, more the fault of human nature.

And it was a deranged human nature that did this.....

 

Beyond words other than thinking the male ego here appears flawed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Minnie the Minx said:

What's social media coming to these days? What started out as an innocent place to keep in touch with friends, posting updates of your lunch type thing, attracting all sorts of deranged individuals posting up this type of content to random strangers on the internet. You have to ask yourself for what purpose and why anything like this tragedy should go viral? 

 

Another reason I give the place a wide miss. Simply horrific. 

 

It's not enough the families of the victims have to cope with the loss of loved ones, they now have to cope with the gazillions of rubbernecks who get a kick out of watching tragic events online and sharing it with other people. Just simply sad.

 

R.I.P.

"What's social media coming to these days?....What about the HUMAN RACE..."The moore i learn about the human race,the moore i love my dog"..RIP..both of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Topic closed pending moderation.

 

/Edit: Topic re-opened.

 

A number of off-topic troll posts, argumentative posts, flames, and replies have been removed from this thread.

 

Please be civil and post in a mature manner.

:wai:

Edited by Jai Dee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...