Facebook Engineer Apologizes Via Reddit For Accidentally Blocking Imgur Across Facebook

from the web-3.0 dept

Tue, Jul 17th 2012 9:36am — Mike Masnick

Here's an odd one. Yesterday, I saw that a top story in the technology subreddit was a claim that Facebook was blocking Imgur, the popular image hosting service (especially popular with Redditors, but which we use here as well). This screenshot was shown (hosted on Imgur, natch):

A few hours later, however, an interesting comment popped up on the Reddit thread, from a user "fisherrider," who claimed to be a Facebook engineer taking responsibility for the situation. What's somewhat stunning is that when companies screw up something, you almost never get this level of honesty about the nature of what happened (especially directly from the person who screwed up):

Hey folks - so this is actually my fault. Literally, I'm the guy who accidentally blocked imgur for a brief period of time today. I'm really sorry. Some background: I'm an engineer who works on the system we use for catching malicious URLs. In the process of dealing with a bad URL that our automated defenses didn't catch, I ran into a rare bug that caused us to incorrectly block some legitimate URLs for a brief time. Right after I figured that out and removed the bad data, I reworked the UI so no one will get bit by the same issue in the future. As a form of apology that I'm sure is insufficient, here is a picture of my dog dressed up for the 4th of July: https://imgur.com/pR4mR

As some have noted, this really is a fantastic apology. It's not filtered through PR and actually seems to come from someone who sounds human -- which is pretty important in the midst of the Reddit faithful. But it should spread beyond just Reddit. When companies screw up, this is a pretty good lesson in how to respond. Admit to the screwup, be clear and honest about it, and explain what happened and what's been done to prevent it from happening again. And... don't let it near a PR person.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: apologies, pr
Companies: facebook, imgur, reddit

46 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 9:41am

Your private information is their little multi-billion dollar secret, you dopes.
Face what?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:23am
  
  Re: Your private information is their little multi-billion dollar secret, you dopes.
  Face sex
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hephaestus (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 9:47am

As if this will ever happen ...
We would like to apologize for the failure of a pipe on our oil platform. It was due to a faulty regulator. This will undoubtedly shorten lives, lead to oil toxicity (aka gulf war syndrome), cause birth defects, and cancer among a large large portion of gulf community.

For this we apologize,

BP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Keii (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 9:51am
  
  Re: As if this will ever happen ...
  BP didn't release a photo of a dog dressed up for the 4th of July.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Ben (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 11:17am
    
    Re: Re: As if this will ever happen ...
    BP didn't release a photo of a dog dressed up for the 4th of July.
    Of course not. They're British. It would have been for the 5th of November with the dog wearing a Guy Fawkes mask or something similar.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Vic, 17 Jul 2012 @ 9:55am

Very nice indeed.
Seeing the dog, city name "San Diego" comes to mind. I wonder if he lives there... 8^)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Doe, 17 Jul 2012 @ 9:55am

Same apology but done through PR department
A mistake was made, not necessarily by us, that caused some content to be blocked. We cannot vouch for the blocked content or the people who posted said content. But some of you want that content and we have decided to give you that content. We are sorry for any inconvenience whether it was real or imagined.

In small print, the apology above does not indicate any wrong doing on our part.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 9:56am

I ran into a rare bug

Mmmmhmmm. I'm guessing a 90% probability that in this case "rare bug" is equal to "fat finger syndrome (ffs)". Not that it matters. Good of 'em to fess up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Glen, 17 Jul 2012 @ 9:58am

I bet the PR department is PISSED they couldn't screw up the admission.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:02am
  
  Re:
  I bet dude gets a pink slip. Not because he messed up the block - that's human, and easily forgivable. He'll be shown the door because he acted outside his little fiefdom and stepped all over the toes of "Corporate Communications".
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Beta (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:08am

interesting...
I see three possibilities:

1) This was cooked up by PR, as a way to soothe the nerds without taking any risk. The company has made no official statement, the message is unauthenticated and deniable, the author is not to the engineer who made the block, but Facebook can withhold that fact or reveal it, depending on how the wind blows.

2) The message is real, and unauthorized, and the author might well get fired for it.

3) The message is real, and some PR person showed rare insight in the decision to authorize it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:25am
  
  Re: interesting...
  4) people at facebook are allowed to talk to the outside world.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ninja (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:26am
  
  Re: interesting...
  4) The dog is the PR manager, which explains why they did it right this time.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hephaestus (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:08am

The whole thing is a publicity stunt. In response to this article. ;)

It�s Official: Social Media Users Happier With Google+ Than With Facebook
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ninja (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:31am
  
  Re:
  People have a generally positive relationship with their search engines, and the 70,000 or so people surveyed by ACSI, for some reason, like FoxNews.com.
  
  Priceless sarcasm or innocent joke?
  
  On a related note, I like Google+ better than Facebook. Not that I use FB that much (I log once a month) but If ppl were mostly at google+ I'd ditch FB for good. Much like I did with Orkut.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Eric Goldman (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:09am

OK, but Facebook is notorious about overly quick to block legitimate URLs as spammy. http://blog.ericgoldman.org/personal/archives/2010/12/distrust_in_the.html Maybe they need a more systemic fix to their manual spam-blocking procedures.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:29am
  
  Re:
  eh, blocking the occasional legitimate URL is a far better problem to have than letting the occasional illegitimate URL through. I have more problems with putting a bandana on a dog and calling it dressed up, that's not even trying.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Ninja (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:37am
    
    Re: Re:
    Arresting an innocent man is better than letting a terrorist at large. Exaggerations apart, I'm ok with a few spams going through. The community can help filter it and isolate the accounts that are spamming. A much more productive task for the engineers would be to help filter out links directing to malware and the likes.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - :Lobo Santo (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:50am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Skull and BoneS!
      So, what with the death penalty and all--rephrasing what you've said--it's better to accidentally kill an innocent person as long as no guilty people are left alive?
      
      Your logic is backwards, better a murderer go free than put one innocent person to death.
      
      Don't buy into the State's terrorist propaganda bullshit, or you'll find yourself both innocent and imprisoned, just like you've accidentally advocated.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 11:11am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Skull and BoneS!
        I cant determine whether its sense of entitlement or hyperbole. god forbid you work anywhere that utilizes websense, which apparently is responsible for killing innocent people. Since that is akin to accidentally and temporarily blocking a third party service.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        :Lobo Santo (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 12:02pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Skull and BoneS!
        Usually, a logical argument, if indeed logical, can be taken to extremes and still make sense.
        
        An illogical position, on the other hand, breaks down when subject to extremes.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        iamtheky (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 12:24pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Skull and BoneS!
        the logical extreme would be assigning facebook brick and mortar criteria with credentialed access. And I would still much rather have that physical security accidentally block someone with valid credentials, over accidentally allowing unauthorized access.
        
        just because some random two examples involve an aggrieved party, does not make the context accurate nor the conclusions appropriate.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        iamtheky (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 12:31pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Skull and BoneS!
        and the opposition was all me, i was signed out apparently...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - :Lobo Santo (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:52am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Sorry! This should have been up one!
      
      Ninja, I agree with your exaggeration for illustrative purposes. Sorry for the placement of my comment, no offense meant.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:39am
    
    Re: Re:
    "eh, blocking the occasional legitimate URL is a far better problem to have than letting the occasional illegitimate URL through."
    
    Careful with what you wish for. That same line of reasoning is what brought us the TSA and the whole "aggressive pat-down" procedure.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:53am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Because concern for the uptime and availability of third party applications and services from the standpoint of security is very much like the TSA...oh wait its not.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Fenderson (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 1:49pm
    
    Re: Re:
    blocking the occasional legitimate URL is a far better problem to have than letting the occasional illegitimate URL through.
    
    I disagree 100%. Getting the occasional illegitimate (whatever that is) URL is far preferable to blocking a legitimate one.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:10am

Not just them
One of the local universities also blocks Imgur as a "personal storage site." (For Guest accounts, at least.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Innocent Victim, 17 Jul 2012 @ 12:11pm
  
  Re: Not just them
  The popular web-blocking/filtering tool WebSense marks imgur as "personal storage site", and this definition file is used by thousands of corporate and edu sites. Once you are on the WebSense filter list, its really really hard to get off it. geocaching.com and the groundspeak forums are blocked by WebSense as malicious even though the sites have proven clean for years.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dionaea (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:18am

I agree with that last line, some PR-people are exceptionally good at creating PR-disasters...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:26am

Isn't it sad when an apology/press release about an incident is handled better by an engineer than the PR department?

Now maybe we should try apply the same concept with copyright, trade negotiations, and internet censorship (or openness). Take out the politicians, lawyers, and lobbyists and put in engineers. We might actually see common sense, logic, solutions and even transparency/documentation!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ninja (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:33am
  
  Re:
  And an environmental disaster!
  
  Disclaimer: I'm an engineer.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
GMacGuffin (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:42am

Hey, dude's got a Border Collie. He must be telling the truth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gwiz (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:43am

Isn't it sad when an apology/press release about an incident is handled better by an engineer than the PR department?

It's been my observation that engineering departments handle a lot of things better than other departments inside a corporation.

I think it may have something to do with the fact that engineers usually deal in hard facts and data.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Vog (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:45am
  
  Re:
  I'm an engineer, and I approve this message.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward With A Unique Writing Style, 17 Jul 2012 @ 12:08pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I work with engineers (I'm the IT department for an engineering company) and I approve of both this message and the one that led to it.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:52am
  
  Re:
  It's been my observation that engineering departments handle a lot of things better than other departments inside a corporation.
  
  I think it may have something to do with the fact that engineers usually deal in hard facts and data.
  
  Might also have something to do with the fact that it's an engineer's job to solve a problem or the corporation gets another one who will.
  
  If a lawyer, politican, or PR person makes a problem worse, it's standard practice....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
FBP Developer, 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:56am

Facebook is also blocking links to my site for no reason
FB Purity is one of the top rated browser extensions on addons.mozilla.org and yet facebook is blocking links to the fbpurity.com website, something is seriously wrong here. FB Purity is a very highly rated and well respected browser extension, that lets you customise and clean up your facebook experience. For Facebook to block links to the site and claim they are "spammy and unsafe" is libellous and and also ironic, considering it helps block spam on facebook.

Facebook need to come clean over this and unblock the site, like they have done with the imgur debacle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 11:48am
  
  Re: Facebook is also blocking links to my site for no reason
  Looks like they got this spam block 100% correct, actually.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Berenerd (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 12:09pm
  
  Re: Facebook is also blocking links to my site for no reason
  So are you now going to sue FB for saying your spammy?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Almost Anonymous (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 1:38pm
  
  Re: Facebook is also blocking links to my site for no reason
  Eddy was right when he said you can make $100/month by marking FBP links as "spammy" on Facebook.
  
  /s
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 11:03am

I have no concerns about Facebook. Don't care if it craters tomorrow and never gets revived.

My comment is more along the lines of the honesty of the engineer. It's a shame in this day and age of personal evaluation into job performance that this level of honesty in admitting a mistake isn't recognized for the quality of the employee.

No one that does things is going to have a perfect record on screw ups. They are going to happen unless you do nothing day after day. When they do, the employee that says, 'It's my fault and this is what I did', just saved his company tons of money in trouble shooting. They know where the problem is and exactly how it occurred and can figure out how to fix it the quickest.

It seems only management needs someone to blame so it isn't their fault. Companies need the above honesty to run the place well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
maclypse (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 1:47pm

...here is a picture of my dog...

Bestest apology ever.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 4:59pm

Haha!
Ironically, my anti-virus tells me that the link to the guy's picture is unsafe and blocks it by default!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jul 2012 @ 5:17pm

I hate FB just a tiny smidgeon less today. So now I only hate FB 99.9999...%.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
gab4moi (profile), 17 Jul 2012 @ 10:44pm

sooo... has Carreon released a pic of a pitbull from hell?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]