Emmanuel Macron, President of the French Republic
- Thread starter Bomberboyokay
- Start date
- Tagged users None
They can win by one vote if they like.
They don't. It's much like the American system with a powerful president and a separate legislative chamber, except the French Parliament is not as powerful as the American Congress.
Both Le Pen and Macron may have difficulties dealing with the legislature on things they need their backing for though, because FN only has two Assembly members and no Senators, and Macron's En Marche! has none in either. Macron's policies will probably have broad support amongst politicians though, as they are pretty liberal.
This will change after the legislative election later in the year, but it's still hard to see either having a workable majority in the Assembly.
Last edited:
- Sep 27, 2014
- 34,227
- 28,859
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Thread starter
- #128
This is an inaccurate description. It is one electorate.
iluvparis
Import Whisperer
- Apr 1, 2005
- 50,055
- 40,651
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Calgary Flames, Man Utd
- Sep 27, 2014
- 34,227
- 28,859
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Thread starter
- #130
I accept your apology.
Maggie5
Moderator
- Moderator
- #132
Too late for USA but seems they are trying for it not to repeat in France.
Facebook Inc said on Thursday it suspended 30,000 accounts in France as the social network giant steps up efforts to stop the spread of fake news, misinformation and spam.
The move, which comes 10 days before the first round of a hotly contested French presidential election, is among the most aggressive yet by Facebook to move against accounts that violate its terms of service, rather than simply respond to complaints.
Facebook is under intense pressure in Europe as governments across the continent threaten new laws and fines unless the company moves quickly to remove extremist propaganda or other content that violates local laws. (reut.rs/2oBwHEO).
The pressure on social media sites including Twitter, Google's YouTube and Facebook has intensified in the run-up to the elections in France and Germany.
Facebook already has a program in France to use outside fact-checkers to combat fake news in users' feeds.
Also on Thursday, Facebook took out full-page ads in Germany's best-selling newspapers to educate readers on how to spot fake news.
Facebook Inc said on Thursday it suspended 30,000 accounts in France as the social network giant steps up efforts to stop the spread of fake news, misinformation and spam.
The move, which comes 10 days before the first round of a hotly contested French presidential election, is among the most aggressive yet by Facebook to move against accounts that violate its terms of service, rather than simply respond to complaints.
Facebook is under intense pressure in Europe as governments across the continent threaten new laws and fines unless the company moves quickly to remove extremist propaganda or other content that violates local laws. (reut.rs/2oBwHEO).
The pressure on social media sites including Twitter, Google's YouTube and Facebook has intensified in the run-up to the elections in France and Germany.
Facebook already has a program in France to use outside fact-checkers to combat fake news in users' feeds.
Also on Thursday, Facebook took out full-page ads in Germany's best-selling newspapers to educate readers on how to spot fake news.
- Oct 20, 2014
- 18,390
- 19,525
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Liverpool
So, they are controlling the narrative to suit their agenda. Sounds like 1930's Germany.
- Aug 2, 2012
- 34,820
- 56,389
- AFL Club
- Geelong
The difference from Nazi Germany is that Facebook is trying to prevent people using their media to spread outrageous lies.
Sort of the opposite to Nazi Germany, actually.
- Oct 20, 2014
- 18,390
- 19,525
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Liverpool
This is where you fail badly. The Germans thought the same thing and look what happened. Facebook has always been controlled by lunatics. This action doesn't surprise me.
So this is just monumentally exceptional content. I hope the Melenchen momentum gets him into the top two! However unlikely.
http://www.fiscalkombat.fr/
http://www.fiscalkombat.fr/
- Jul 25, 2010
- 2,182
- 1,206
- AFL Club
- Geelong
What percentage of news stories do you think are genuinely truth seeking vs those that are pushed to either make $$$, serve a particular audience or push a particular narrative?
- Aug 2, 2012
- 34,820
- 56,389
- AFL Club
- Geelong
I don't know what the percentage breakdown is, but they total 100% of "news stories".
The Facebook actions aren't directed at "news stories".
They're directed at people using the site to spread deliberate lies under the guise of "news".
- Aug 2, 2012
- 34,820
- 56,389
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Same old same old, right-wingers screaming that they've been stifled because people disagree with or don't want to listen to what they say.
VineyIsLORD
Norm Smith Medallist
- May 6, 2016
- 5,437
- 5,362
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Banned
- #143
Its actualy scary how much political power exists in the hands of a single man who has 55 billion dollars in net worth.
Ned_Flanders
Make me an Admin!
- Aug 22, 2009
- 77,158
- 142,364
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- 76'ers
I have to admit while Im a big advocate of free speech, I dont get the argument on net censorship
if I write a book on how awesome Richmond is, and worshiping the great combover will deliver us to salvation, Harper Collins isnt obliged to print it. They are a commercial operation, and if they deem my manifesto to be full of s**t, no one will blink that they choose not to publish it.
Likewise, if they have issues politically, morally, or spiritually with KB worship and this is why they choose not to publish, no one blinks.
However Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube MUST deliver ANY content given to them? Why? TV networks dont. Publishers of magazines and newspapers dont.
Even more ridiculous, these are not monopolistic platforms. You want a video shared on the net, youtube isn't your sole outlet. Same with Facebook and Twitter for social media.
People need to get it through their head. Yes you have a right to free speech, but you dont have a right to force others to diseminate it for you
FireKrakouer
Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest.
- Jul 5, 2011
- 15,302
- 23,096
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
I mostly agree, they are a private organisation providing a free service, they have a right to host whatever material they like. But it's also an honesty issue for me. Instead of telling users "we're cracking down on fake news", tell them the truth: "we're cracking down on pro-conservative news".
(In b4 "they're one and the same"
)
Ned_Flanders
Make me an Admin!
- Aug 22, 2009
- 77,158
- 142,364
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- 76'ers
I mostly agree, they are a private organisation providing a free service, they have a right to host whatever material they like. But it's also an honesty issue for me. Instead of telling users "we're cracking down on fake news", tell them the truth: "we're cracking down on pro-conservative news".
(In b4 "they're one and the same"
Im happy to buy the premise of the "fake news" crack down. Right now I just think the right do it a hell of a lot better than the left. Remember the net is full of stuff, but its only stuff thats getting attention or easily found that gets banned.
the left stuff has generally either been too fringe in audience, or not packaged well enough to go viral.
The whole fake news thing has been around as a tactic for some time remember. Most assumptions of cultures approving of cannibalism go back to colonial powers using fake news about the new world, asia, and africa to justify conquest and slavery
on net smarts, its an evolving thing. the left in the usa for example have been much smarter at using the net for micro fundraising, the right for moibilization of supporters. these will change as the net evolves.
**sorry for generalizing on the whole left right thing, its more complex than that, but it makes the answer a lot easier and simplier
FireKrakouer
Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest.
- Jul 5, 2011
- 15,302
- 23,096
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
I'd be fine with it if there existed a fact checking site that both sides would agree is unbiased. I'm all for complete fabrications being flagged, but sometimes there are gray areas in what is or isn't true. Even when truth is black and white, the fact checkers still sometimes get it wrong.
While Google and Facebook aren't strictly monopolies, they have a user base that is so far beyond what any of their competitors have that they may as well be.
A critique of fact checking sites:
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/media/310849-who-will-check-facebooks-fact-checkers
Some examples of them getting it wrong:
Http://thefederalist.com/2017/02/21/4-recent-examples-show-why-no-one-trusts-media-fact-checks/
Ned_Flanders
Make me an Admin!
- Aug 22, 2009
- 77,158
- 142,364
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- 76'ers
Noone will ever agree with a fact checking site 100%/because they dont want the "facts" in their favor disputed
Nature of politics today, winning is more important that doing stuff or truth
FireKrakouer
Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest.
- Jul 5, 2011
- 15,302
- 23,096
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Valid point. I had a brief stint as a local footy umpire, and I felt like I must have done a decent job when both sides were equally pissed off at me. If only one side were pissed off, I realised I likely made a few stuff-ups.
It seems to me like the fact checkers are really only pissing off one side. This could mean that the fact checkers are partisan, or it could mean that one side uses fake news more than the other (as you suggested).
Ned_Flanders
Make me an Admin!
- Aug 22, 2009
- 77,158
- 142,364
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- 76'ers
not more - better
look at the stuff going on about big pharma and big oil. they are around, but they are so ridiculous people (for the most part) just ignore them
Similar threads
