Posted on 04/12/2018 6:37:27 PM PDT by marshmallow
Washington D.C., Apr 11, 2018 / 01:12 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg faced questions from lawmakers about his company’s censorship of Catholic content during his two-day congressional hearing following the revelation that millions of Facebook users’ personal data had been compromised.
Zuckerberg apologized and said that the company “made a mistake” in blocking an advertisement for a Catholic theology degree advertisement by Franciscan University of Steubenville, when asked about it by Washington state Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers on the second day of questioning.
The ad, which featured a crucifix, was rejected by Facebook over Easter on the grounds that its content was “excessively violent” and “sensational.” Facebook later apologized, saying that the ad had been blocked erroneously and did not violate terms of service. Zuckerberg on Wednesday emphasized the large number of ads that are reviewed daily by the Facebook team, saying, “I wouldn’t extrapolate from a few examples to assume that the overall system is biased.”
The tech CEO also expressed regret that he did not “take a broad enough view of our responsibility” to prevent tools from being used for harm, particularly with regards to “fake news, for foreign interference in elections, and hate speech, as well as developers and data privacy.”
Senator Ted Cruz (R.-Texas) confronted Zuckerberg about alleged bias and censorship of political and religious content on the technology platform, saying Facebook “has blocked over two dozen Catholic pages” as well as conservative content “after determining their content and brand were, quote, ‘unsafe to the community.’”
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicworldreport.com ...
Mistake?
Not buying it.
The conservative content purge at FB is exactly as accidental as the IRS slow walking of only conservative group tax-exempt applications.
He apologizes a lot. He apologized for Diamond and Silk, too.
He can apologize all the livelong day. I don’t give a rip. Did he say he would change policy at FB? I don’t think so. He words are empty platitudes.
Not buying it.
Nope, not buying it either. These chumps did it on purpose. What arrogance. These elitists must think those of us in flyover country, are incredibly ignorant. They hold us in utter contempt. By the way, I am in SUPER DUPER flyover country. 😁😂👍
Zuckerberg is the new standard of useful idiot in a high tech world of state organized propaganda and it's tentacles.
I want to see if FB users will be given a new user’s agreement. If a new one isn’t given then nothing changes.
I apologize for quitting facebook.
..NOT
Nothing he said means anything.
This is all political kabuki theater.
Now let's move on to the next joke our Congress wants to waste our money doing without improving the country.
I never went on it at all. Just didn’t trust it at all.
I think Veritas uncovered what these social media content monitors are all about...HB1 visa holders from Mumbai and Istanbul with no concept of American values.
The hypocrites. They complain about Facebook yet cry to mods on FR about threads critical of Romam Catholicism. They seek to have threads and posters banned. Then they hide behind a caucus protection to avoid the discussion.
I think this is the reason Zucker is in front of congress. Censorship of political views.
Wow. Maybe we’re just sick and tired of have EVERY single thread we post disrupted by rude individuals whose idea of “Christian witness” is always and ONLY trashing Catholics. Incidentally, Protestants and others use the caucus protection freely as well.
Correct me if I am wrong, but FB is a publicly-held company. As such, they can pretty much do as they wish, right? So these hearings are really a dog-and-pony show. If FB broke the law, they need to be taken to court; if not, they should be allowed to do whatever they wish to do under current laws.
Did this break a law? If so, which one? If no law was broken, this is just a dog-and-pony show during which Senators can appear powerful and important.
Demonstrably false.
And from what I've observed in these exchanges it is usually, though not always, the Roman Catholic who resorts to profanity and/or the personal attack.
The Roman Catholic does not like it when the false doctrines of Rome are brought out into the light. I've used Roman Catholic sources to show Roman Catholics where their dogmas are in contradiction of Scripture. Many Roman Catholics don't like that and that is when the name calling or the cries to the mods begin.
Besides....ya'll have one Roman Catholic poster who is on what seems to be on a personal vendetta to take out your pope. I daresay if non-Roman Catholics were as critical of your pope as that poster is that Roman Catholics would be so understanding.
I don't recall a non-Roman Catholic resorting to profanity though there may some examples.
Incidentally, Protestants and others use the caucus protection freely as well.
I don't believe I've ever used the caucus thread protection.
Juat a quick scan of the Religion threads this morning shows 5 Catholic Caucus threads....no body else has posted a caucus thread as of 8:06 am est.
I believe in an open exchange of ideas.
It's a good thing Paul didn't have the mindset of some of the Roman Catholics on FR....the Gospel would have only been presented within the shut doors of the synagogues and never shared with the Gentiles.
“EVERY” thread.
Not......
Not to mention that a number of those threads posted by Catholics are hit pieces on anything non-Catholic.
So if you expect them to go without comment, you are very naive.
And I’ve had Catholics come on threads I’ve posted disrupted by individuals whose only interest is trashing *Prots*.
You can save the faux, self-righteous outrage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.