Facebook closing atheist pages, sign petition

[Nonsensei]

From Facebook itself:

We prohibit content deemed to be directly harmful, but allow content that is offensive or controversial. We define harmful content as anything organizing real world violence, theft, or property destruction, or that directly inflicts emotional distress on a specific private individual (e.g. bullying).  A list of prohibited categories of content can be found in our Community Standards at www.facebook.com/communitystandards.

Apparently Muslims are reporting atheist facebook groups and individual pages for violating the above rule somehow and facebook is just auto-closing the pages without doing any investigation.

The same problem exists on Youtube. The service in question is so big that it simply automates its policing tasks and if that system gets abused they dont have to care at all. Why? Because they're so big that they can afford to literally not even lift a single finger no matter how bad the abuse gets. They will still rake it in.

[SGOS]

From Facebook itself:

Apparently Muslims are reporting atheist facebook groups and individual pages for violating the above rule somehow and facebook is just auto-closing the pages without doing any investigation.

The same problem exists on Youtube. The service in question is so big that it simply automates its policing tasks and if that system gets abused they dont have to care at all. Why? Because they're so big that they can afford to literally not even lift a single finger no matter how bad the abuse gets. They will still rake it in.

I've noticed this sort of mechanism on other sites.  If a certain number of people click a thumbs down icon on a comment, it appears to get deactivated.  Well, usually it's still there, but you have to open it to look at it.  It's like it's put there to censor what some people object to.  While it may not be a violation of freedom of speech, it certainly contradicts the spirit of free speech.  When I see the little notice that it's "not shown due to objections," I almost always click on it, if only as an objection to censorship.

[Baruch]

There is the phenomenon of preferential Muslim censorship.  The Muslims reserve, for themselves, to censor anyone anywhere that offends them, in any medium ... as hate speech.  This includes insulting Jesus or Moses, not must Muhammad.  Muslims are inherently opposed to free speech ... but then they aren't Western.  If a non-Muslim marks what they publish as hate speech, it is protected ... because infidels do what infidels do.  That Western people assist them with this, is typical of quislings.

[marom1963]

I don't use Facebook. Still, it bothers me that they have the gall to censor the content of user pages - not after having advertised themselves as a place for such free expression. It's a pig-sty of a place. I'd be glad to see it whither and die, shrivel up and blow away.

[Mermaid]

I don't use Facebook. Still, it bothers me that they have the gall to censor the content of user pages - not after having advertised themselves as a place for such free expression. It's a pig-sty of a place. I'd be glad to see it whither and die, shrivel up and blow away.

Meh. Facebook is different things to different people. I happen to love it, it's a way for me to keep in touch with my family and friends. It's free. I do not find it to be a "pig sty" of a place at all.

[PickelledEggs]

All of them are arab translated pages. And not all of the "closed" pages are actually taken down. Nothing is going to come of this petition. These petitions usually do nothing.

[Jack89]

This is what happens when a tolerant society puts up with an intolerant one.  Islam will dominate because Western progressive tolerance will let them.  Facebook and YouTube are private businesses and they can censor content all they want, and will do so as long as it doesn't affect their profits.

[Nonsensei]

This is what happens when a tolerant society puts up with an intolerant one.  Islam will dominate because Western progressive tolerance will let them.  Facebook and YouTube are private businesses and they can censor content all they want, and will do so as long as it doesn't affect their profits.

What?

This is what happens when people abuse an automated system.

[Baruch]

What?

This is what happens when people abuse an automated system.

We like to abuse un-automated systems too ;-)

[drunkenshoe]

This is not about tolerance. It's about money. Facebook doesn't have any principles of tolerating or not tolerating ideologies or religions or ideas or what not but simply trying to get more and more people use their social media platform.

Facebook doesn't give a fuck about free speech. Nor any other social platforms as long as there is good profit. They never do/did. This is what we call capitalism in short. They would sell it to ISIL or let's say...Eskimos or Zulus if it proved to pay more than its worth right now.

It astonishes me when people treat big companies as if they are individuals with conscience or consciousness or with some goal other than more and more profit.

[Nonsensei]

This is not about tolerance. It's about money. Facebook doesn't have any principles of tolerating or not tolerating ideologies or religions or ideas or what not but simply trying to get more and more people use their social media platform.

Facebook doesn't give a fuck about free speech. Nor any other social platforms as long as there is good profit. They never do/did. This is what we call capitalism in short. They would sell it to ISIL or let's say...Eskimos or Zulus if it proved to pay more than its worth right now.

It astonishes me when people treat big companies as if they are individuals with conscience or consciousness or with some goal other than more and more profit.

Don't act so astonished. I think its a good thing that people expect more from social networking and media companies. The worst thing that can happen to free speech is if people get used to having it abridged on the internet. Its exactly this attitude that supported the recent victory over the question of net neutrality. As long as people expect and demand more, even from private corporations, there will be sufficient societal pressure on those companies to conform. The larger the company, the more pressure is required, but an incident like this is just another log in the fire, so to speak. Eventually the blaze will get big enough that even a giant like Facebook will be compelled to change something.

For all the faults of capitalism, this mechanism is a significant strength. Companies are slaves to the court of public opinion.

[drunkenshoe]

Wishful thinking. Fantasy.

[marom1963]

Don't act so astonished. I think its a good thing that people expect more from social networking and media companies. The worst thing that can happen to free speech is if people get used to having it abridged on the internet. Its exactly this attitude that supported the recent victory over the question of net neutrality. As long as people expect and demand more, even from private corporations, there will be sufficient societal pressure on those companies to conform. The larger the company, the more pressure is required, but an incident like this is just another log in the fire, so to speak. Eventually the blaze will get big enough that even a giant like Facebook will be compelled to change something.

For all the faults of capitalism, this mechanism is a significant strength. Companies are slaves to the court of public opinion.

Public opinion is created in the media and changes upon demand. The average American has the attention span of a flea. Only hot button issues like abortion hold people's attention for any length of time, and that's because they are uncomplicated - for/against, nothing in between - at least not as far as the public is concerned. Whatever opinion is in the wilderness is the one that lasts because a handful of angry morons can turn a cabal into a political power of sizable magnitude: it doesn't matter that most Republicans are far more moderate on abortion than the party itself; the party itself must cater to its extremists because they are unfailingly politically active.