Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
https://www.facebook.com/zuck/videos/10103953494202721/
FACEBOOK IS INTRODUCING a new way to watch tv shows, with its Watch tab set to be rolled out worldwide.
Part of the company’s plans to incorporate more video on its app, Facebook said that the content users see will be based on what friends and communities are watching.
The videos you watch will have comments and reactions under them like any other Facebook posts. You’ll also be able to search for new shows based on how people reacted to them, such as “shows where many people have used the ‘haha’ reaction”.
It envisages having a range of shows from reality to comedy to live sports on the platform, and Facebook is funding some of its own shows to get the project up and running.
In a statement, CEO Mark Zuckerberg said: “We believe it’s possible to rethink a lot of experiences through the lens of building community – including watching video.
Watching a show doesn’t have to be passive. It can be a chance to share an experience and bring people together who care about the same things.
The service is only available in certain parts of the US for the time being, but Facebook said the service will be rolled out everywhere else soon.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
My great grandfather on my mother’s side wrote newspaper articles and editorials seeking the exoneration of Myles Joyce.
Myles knew little or no English, the language of the trial. He was an Irish speaker. There was no actual translation facility available. The trial was a travesty of justice.
How can the irish justice system pardon him when it was the British justice system at the time that sentenced him? Genuine question
@Richy: the chain of legal succession following the change in sovereignty.
@Richy: A relevant question and easily answered. Having rid ourselves of our illegitimate occupiers, it now comes within the remit of our native Government to examine any injustice committed during their illegal occupation. To pardon the victim in this case is to acknowledge that a gross injustice was done to him and to exonerate him of all guilt. Like many Irish people during the occupation he suffered the ultimate penalty. It was judicial murder, not a legal execution, despite the trappings of a ‘justice system’ being in place.
Surprising the comments are open, is this not a legal case?
@Nick Allen: unlikely that any juror will be influenced by your remarks…
@John Considine: Its quite telling how the journal operates.
@truthdetective101: __ It didn’t take you long to arrive at conclusion, you’ve only been here 5 minutes :p
Must be a world record. 1,882 murders! What did he allegedly use?
@John Stevenson: underappreciated – you have my like
@John Stevenson: +1 good sir
@John Stevenson: It was a family of five that were murdered in 1882.
@Sighle A. Ni Chuana: Ah Sighle… :-/
@Sighle A. Ni Chuana: ah, a family of five, i see that now. the headline got me thinking ive seriously missed a bit of irish history and should definitely read this article to get myself back up to speed
The Irish state was founded in 1922, so is it up to the English system to grant a posthumous pardon?
@Tony Joyce: the chain of legal succession.
A clear miscarriage of justice time justice was done. A very sad case.
>Man executed after being found guilty of 1882 murders
This must be 1,882nd time the Journal screwed up a headline with a grammatical mistake.
I call upon the Editors in the Journal to read “Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation”
@Rear Admiral: Nothing wrong with the headline. If they had written “…1,882 murders…” then you’d have a point.
@Cathal Murphy: your inserted comma is optional
@Rear Admiral: The English occupation was not a State as such, simply a criminal presence designed to deny our citizens’ rights instead of vindicating them as is the first duty of a State.
@Rear Admiral: You’re assuming, of course, that they can read!
@Rear Admiral: Yes, but how would like them to refer to the murders? If it was last year you would write e.g. “… convicted of 2017 murders…” etc. Context would tell you that it was a year, not an amount of murders. Unless the cold case is from the early decades of the 1st century AD, I think most people would assume a year rather than an amount of murders…
Its never to late
@Billy Connelly:
Try telling him that.
@Billy Connelly: I was being sarcastic
I’m sure if Myles was alive today he would be delighted at this news……….
@Kerry Blake: if he was alive today he’d be on bail & a file would be being prepared for the DPP.
All convictions secured under the British Occupation should be repealed.
That’s a lot of murders…
can you delete my comment please.
Fat lot of good it will do him.
More prissy posturing by the bleeding hearts.
I suppose we will have to pay recompense to everyone living within 50 miles.
I read a book on Maam Treasna 25 years ago. The book exonerated him.
Who’s the Flanagan that’s quoted here? Gets one sole mention with zero reference. Proof reader anyone?
The state did not exist when he was executed….. how can it pardon him?
Have a pardon when the person is still alive, dead people don’t have feelings inside and out
1882 – That’s a lot of murders.
have your say