Facebook’s latest policy update supported violence against Paul Joseph Watson and Alex Jones.

zuckerberg-death-threat
Facebook Condones Violence Against ‘Dangerous Individuals’ Before Reversing Itself.
Facebook’s latest policy update supported violence against Paul Joseph Watson and Alex Jones.

By Ian Miles Cheong

Facebook Condones Violence Against ‘Dangerous Individuals’ Before Reversing Itself.


July 12, 2019

Facebook issued, and later deleted, a new policy stating its position supporting violence against banned figures like Paul Joseph Watson and Alex Jones, both of whom have been banned from the platform.

The update went live on the site’s Community Standards page before being retracted, following widespread online backlash.

The update read:
“Do not post: Threats that could lead to death (and other forms of high-severity violence) of any target(s) where threat is defined as any of the following:
Statements of intent to commit high-severity violence; or
Calls for high-severity violence (unless the target is an organization
or individual covered in the Dangerous Individuals and Organizations
policy),
or is described as having carried out violent crimes or sexual offenses, wherein criminal/predator status has been established by media reports, market knowledge of news event, etc.” (Emphasis added).

In May, Facebook issued bans for a number of conservative political pundits including Paul Joseph Watson, whom they designated a “dangerous individual.”

“[It] is now “progressive” to allow a handful of corporate monopolists to control who has free speech and what opinions they can communicate,” wrote Watson of his ban. “What was the point of the trials of humanity over the past 300 years if we were just going to end up with some little nerds in California dictating the terms of human civilization to us from behind their MacBook screens?”
pjw
Paul Joseph Watson

With the recent update, Facebook ostensibly deemed it permissible for its users to issue threats against Watson and other “dangerous individuals,” who have been cast alongside ISIS and other terrorist organizations, some of which continue to maintain large presences on the platform, including jihadist organizations like Hezbollah and Boko Haram, and the left-wing Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). Pages dedicated to these organizations can be easily found by typing their names into Facebook’s built-in search engine.

“The largest social media company in the world with over 2 billion users literally says its fine to incite violence against me, despite this being illegal. They are painting a target on my back.” – Paul Joseph Watson

As Watson says, violent threats issued against him on the platform are still considered illegal under U.K. law regardless of Facebook’s stance on the matter.

“The largest social media company in the world with over 2 billion users literally says its fine to incite violence against me, despite this being illegal,” he wrote. “They are painting a target on my back.”

Following a backlash on social media, Facebook has modified the policy update. The company issued a statement to explain that the language it previously used was “imprecise.”

“The language we previously used to describe our policies against violence and incitement was imprecise. We have since replaced it to more clearly explain the policy and underlying rationale,” Facebook stated. “In some cases, we see aspirational or conditional threats directed at terrorists and other violent actors (e.g. Terrorists deserve to be killed), and we deem those non credible absent specific evidence to the contrary.”

It’s worth noting that in addition to its tacit support of violence against “Dangerous Individuals,” the company also deemed it acceptable to threaten anyone “described as having carried out violent crimes or sexual offenses, wherein criminal/predator status has been established by media reports.”

In other words, if you’ve been judged guilty in the court of public opinion, you’re fair game.

Ian Miles Cheong is the managing editor of Human Events

Advertisements

Despite legal threat, new anti-Facebook site launches to claim tech giant is ‘killing the internet’


© Leah Millis/Reuters
(Aahhh poor little Zuckerberg, don’t ya just feel like crying for him???) my rhetoric – sorry

—–
Despite legal threat, new anti-Facebook site launches to claim tech giant is ‘killing the internet’
Published time: 15 Aug, 2018 17:12
Edited time: 16 Aug, 2018 09:31
https://on.rt.com/9cgj

A new anti-Facebook blog, giving small and mid-sized publishers a place to vent their frustrations over the tech giant’s censorship policies and algorithms hiding their content, has gone live despite legal threats.

FacebookZoo, hosted on niche publishing platform Maven, went live on Tuesday. It aims to give disgruntled publishers an avenue to criticize the company’s censorship policy, as well as outline how its “ever-changing algorithms” have drastically affected their livelihoods in favor of shareholder profit.
Read more
Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro interviewed at Telesur studios in Caracas, Venezuela © Xinhua Facebook vanishes Venezuela-based left-leaning news network again

The blog has already survived an attempt by Facebook’s legal team to shut it down. The attempt failed to go anywhere as Maven had the foresight to trademark ‘FacebookZoo’ while it was in beta mode, according to the New York Post.

Facebook’s legal representative known only as ‘Ethel’ wrote to Maven, saying: “Your unauthorized use of the Facebook name is likely to cause confusion as to whether you or your company’s activities are authorized, endorsed, or sponsored by Facebook when, in fact, they are not.”

Ethel also warned Maven that in order to avoid “consumer confusion” and “harm” to Facebook’s brand, it should “stop using the name and domain facebookzoo.com and disable any site available at that address.”

Since going live, FacebookZoo has had a slew of content creators air their grievances, following complaints that Facebook’s new algorithms had slashed their customer base and ad revenues earlier this year.

One cause for concern was artists working hard to build a following on social media platforms without remuneration, and when it was monetized, “Facebook had rules in place,” to control who made money, according to Greg Watkins and Chuck Creekmur of AllHipHop.com.

Asking artists why they were willing to give their content away for free on social media platform, Greg Watkins said the pair regularly told artists: “We actually represent what you’re doing and you’re making all these guys billionaires by giving it to them with the hope that at some point you may be able to reach an audience.”Delete


InfoWars host Alex Jones © Sean P. Anderson Alex Jones suspended from Twitter after tweet calling to end censorship

“The thing is, we’re all slaves at the end of the day, right? To Facebook, to YouTube,” writes Alicé Anil, a political commentator and satirist, who noticed a radical drop in follower engagement after Facebook ‘tweaked’ its algorithms.

“The moment that they decide to change their algorithm, we are f*****… Our business model has been completely jeopardized just because of a single decision that was made,” she added.

Facebook’s censorship policy is another issue tackled by the site. Boyce Watkins, founder of Black Business School, said her page was “killed” by a “Facebook bot” just as it approached a million likes.

Aimed at promoting “economic intelligence and financial literacy amongst Black communities,” Black Business School was earning $250,000 a year from Facebook, however someone quoting Malcolm X in a post saw the page pulled without warning and suspended for two years.

“They’re bullies,” Watkins said. “We could not even get anyone on the phone to find out why we were suspended.”

Facebook claims that its algorithm change, which favored friends and family over media sites, was a way to get back to its roots as a site that connected people.

Subscribe to RT newsletter to get stories the mainstream media won’t tell you.

Whistleblower Testifies Facebook Listens to You EVERYWHERE—Here’s How To Stop It — tomfernandez28’s Blog

Zuckerberg ain’t laughing no more, is he?

By Matt Agorist In June of 2016, as Instagram celebrated reaching 500 million monthly users, Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook, posted a photo of himself enjoying the moment. The photo quickly went viral, not because people like Zuckerberg, but because it showed the owner of a company—that requests permission to record through your camera and […]

via Whistleblower Testifies Facebook Listens to You EVERYWHERE—Here’s How To Stop It — tomfernandez28’s Blog