Posted on 05/08/2016 11:43:28 PM PDT by Impala64ssa
10570
SHARES facebook icon FACEBOOK 10537 twitter icon TWITTER email icon EMAIL more icon Facebook Admits to Censoring Conservative Websites… Steven Crowder Wednesday May 4 2016
I mean, censoring conservatives on social media really shouldn’t be shocking. Especially coming from Facebook, who actively works with other countries to censor what citizens can see (read “Zuckerberg Caugh on Live Mic Telling Merkel that Facebook Will Delete Anti-Islamic Migrant Posts” here).
But now, we’ve got the SJW leftists at Facebook on the record,
They were also told to select articles from a list of preferred media outlets that included sites like the New York Times, Time, Variety, and other traditional outlets. They would regularly avoid sites like World Star Hip Hop, The Blaze, and Breitbart, but were never explicitly told to suppress those outlets. They were also discouraged from mentioning Twitter by name in headlines and summaries, and instead asked to refer to social media in a broader context.
News curators also have the power to “deactivate” (or blacklist) a trending topic—a power that those we spoke to exercised on a daily basis. A topic was often blacklisted if it didn’t have at least three traditional news sources covering it, but otherwise the protocol was murky—meaning a curator could ostensibly blacklist a topic without a particularly good reason for doing so.
So now, whenever you hear your favorite conservative blog (like say, this one for example) talk about how their engagement and reach has suddenly taken a hit for no reason what so ever, you know why.
Listen, I understand that this is not a First Amendment issue. Facebook has the right to curate whatever they want. They have the right to boot whatever content they want. It’s a business. Okay? Okay.
The problem here is that Facebook has been actively lying about their behind-the-scenes censorship practices. They’ve also courted clients and taken millions (possibly billions) of dollars from Conservative media entities in advertising, who were presented with the concept of an open, financially viable social media platform. The problem is with Facebook changing the rules based on ideology. Yes, this has happened to us quite a bit.
Now, full disclosure, I have a direct contact at Facebook to reach when these problems arise. Here’s the issue.
A) They generally don’t respond.
B) In THIS instance, Facebook was never able to tell me which post was the problem, NOR WHICH POLICY IT VIOLATED.
How can a partner know how to distribute content in the future if Facebook won’t even tell them what the polices are, nor how the client in question violated them?
That’s the problem, and it’s by design. Facebook gets to hide behind ever-shifting guidelines (unethical-bordering-on-illegal), while claiming neutrality. The only difference is that now we know that this is not the case. We know that Facebook selectively censors voices based merely on opinion. They’ve lied about it.
That’s the problem. But are you surprised? Modern leftists are fascists. It’s the rule, not the exception. Yes, of course when it comes to freedom of speech. The progressive left believes in uniformity in all walks of life. Ideologically and yes, even economically. Case in point… Bernie Sanders.
I go one beyond censorship of Facebook.
I have never used it from the inception of it.
I knew it.
I could smell it coming.
NEVER signed up.
Never will.
Interesting post/thread. (not on Facebook)
We knew that. And they deliberately favor jihadi accounts because they feel that muzziys are oppressed by those evil oppressor Christians.
That is why I do not go on Facebook.
Same here. People mention it every day. Some are astounded I can exist without it. And without Twitter, too.
ABC is using Facebook 'trending' to cover the election. The partnership is known:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/10/facebook-data-mining-for-political-views-197933
Facebook data mining for political views
By Hadas Gold | 10/30/14 10:19 PM EDT
Facebook is mining its data of users' posts to find out how users feel about certain candidates or issues and sharing that data with ABC News and BuzzFeed for use in their 2016 reporting, the social-networking site will announce on Friday.
“Facebook data mining for political views”
How’s that going to work if they delete posts of a political nature that they don’t like? People will decide to not bother posting and the data will be skewed. Of course, they may not care about skewed data.
That's precisely what they want- skewed data to influence the low-information voters.
later
I (and many "friends") are currently in a battle with a quasi-branch of the federal government. They were prepared to roll over us with no opposition. I started a Facebook group to spread the word and was surprised when it grew to over 100 members. a couple of months later it's swollen to almost 1000 members, and this is a private group. As we gained members, we gained valuable experience from the various people who are engaged. that experience allowed us to put real pressure on those bureaucrats that were to decide our fate last week.
We were able to generate real grass-roots power and gained some major concessions from them in round one. We continue to organize toward an acceptable solution that will prevent the destruction of over $100M of private property. Had Facebook not been around to use as an organizing medium, we most certainly would have been defeated.
Again, Facebook the company may be evil, but the medium has a lot of value if you have a need to use it.
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.