I mean ultimately it's just a social network/communication technology. It's not at all setup to police people's speech, so there'd be a huge cost to dealing with that.
If anything, it could enable the local government to do the policing and prevent hate killings. Unless the government itself is participating in that. Then who's to blame here? (The government/people are)
It's totally set up to police people's speech! That's what the "report" button and paid moderators are for!
It's just that in peripheral markets like the Sri Lankan case I mentioned, they're not willing to put in the financial investment to be a responsible social network; they had no Sinhalese speaking moderators, no staff in-country, and did not respond to either reports of content inciting violence or direct outreach from the government. Until they were blocked and realized their precious market share was in danger.
Facebook can do all those good things you mentioned, and it generally chooses not to until the consequences become too enormous to brush off.
I mean ultimately it's just a social network/communication technology. It's not at all setup to police people's speech, so there'd be a huge cost to dealing with that.
If anything, it could enable the local government to do the policing and prevent hate killings. Unless the government itself is participating in that. Then who's to blame here? (The government/people are)