Facebook Declares BBC Article About French Political Polls 'Unsafe'
from the dave,-i-can't-let-you-post-that... dept
Lots of people have reasonable concerns about platforms like Facebook which not only provide an avenue for free expression -- but which also have the power to suddenly decide it won't allow certain forms of expression. Admittedly, there's always a line to be drawn somewhere. People are happy that Facebook tries to keep out spam and scams, but it's still worrying when it seems to want to filter out perfectly legitimate news stories. On Sunday, Nadim Kobeissi tweeted that Facebook wouldn't allow the sharing of a BBC article on the latest political polling in France.Facebook, you're going full Orwell. Never go full Orwell. pic.twitter.com/wsBpQNhMqE
— Nadim Kobeïssi (@kaepora) December 6, 2015
And, again, this comes just after we've seen American politicians calling for Facebook and others to magically determine how to block "bad" content that might inspire terrorists. And, it comes just as Google's Eric Schmidt argued that these kinds of filters should be more common. Yet, examples like this show just how problematic the idea of these kinds of filters can be.
The more pressure put on companies like Facebook to do that kind of proactive filtering, the more likely that perfectly legitimate information and news stories like the BBC story here get blocked. And that should be seen as immensely problematic if you believe in free expression and the ability to share ideas freely.
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: content, filters, free speech
Companies: bbc, facebook
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This has happened before
https://www.facebook.com/EricAllenBell/posts/703700949707896
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RMS was right
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: RMS was right
no, being right is easy, being heard AND persuasive is hard...
(ESPECIALLY when the deck is stacked against you with a korporate-kontrolled media...)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This will tell you if the issue is just a plain URL block,or if they're doing some kind of 'intelligent' page scanning which is catching something it doesn't like.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My Experience
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And yet there's still spam
And don't get me started on all the "news" sites that people link-to which contain crap, lies, hoaxes, and other misinformation.
Yet Facebook doesn't allow a link to the BBC website?! Wow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
facebook: rigorous enforcement sometimes, blind eye other times
Facebook has also been deleting the accounts of people and organizations that Hollywood objects to. One recent example is the bittorrent site RarBG, which is not only DMCA compliant, but has never posted any links to content on its Facebook page.
Perhaps one of the oddest cases of Facebook censorship was of that temporarily-famous college cheerleader who posted hunting safari photos a couple of years ago -- yet the Facebook pages that popped up calling for her murder (like the Facebook page named "Kill Kendall Jones") were left untouched, despite repeated pleas to Facebook from her father. It took a groundswell of protest (and reportedly legions of people threatening to quit Facebook over the issue) before Facebook was finally forced to step in and take action.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: facebook: rigorous enforcement sometimes, blind eye other times
Inconsistent, yes, but not really mysterious in my experience. They seem to take action only when they receive a number of complaints so if, say, high profile right-wing hate groups get shut down more than PETA-style groups, that may simply be because people react differently to those kinds of issues (reports vs. ignore).
"Facebook has also been deleting the accounts of people and organizations that Hollywood objects to. One recent example is the bittorrent site RarBG, which is not only DMCA compliant, but has never posted any links to content on its Facebook page."
This one?
https://www.facebook.com/RARBG-1592136291052061/?fref=ts
or this one?
https://www.facebook.com/rarbgMovies/?fref=ts
If it's an older one, do you have any links to why it may have been removed? If Facebook are complying with DMCA notices themselves, it's not strictly their fault even if the site would prefer they fight on their side to protect them from such notices. I'd hope a DMCA compliant gorup would at least understand what a pain in the arse that would be.
As for the cheerleader, I'm unfamiliar with the case. But, from your description it sounds like the problem was with not pro-actively disabling the threat page, not that they were wrong in disabling the account with offensive content according to their T&Cs.
I see your points, but given that some people on Facebook seem to have no problem sharing "this photo was banned, share it to everyone!" type posts that are obviously fake, I take a pinch of salt with this kind of criticism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: facebook: rigorous enforcement sometimes, blind eye other times
Your googling skills are seriously lacking, as a simple search for "rarbg" and "facebook" returns this Torrentfreak news article (which explains everything) as the top search result:
https://torrentfreak.com/facebook-removes-rarbg-page-after-copyright-complaint-150605/
https://torrentfreak.com/facebook-removes-rarbg-page-after-copyright-complaint-150605/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I Never Trusted These Liberal News Sights
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Facebook could be the start of the fall of civilization as we know it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Friendster was killed off by Myspace, which was killed off by Facebook. So its just a matter of waiting for the next 'social' site that will attract Facebook's users and resist the temptation of being bought out.
http://www.wired.com/2013/02/friendster-autopsy/
But it's worth noting that Facebook fights dirty whenever a rival comes along to challenge its dominance, using such below-the-belt tactics as banning any mention of rival site Tsu in people's posts on Facebook. But after enforcing the ban for two months, criticism of Facebook's anti-competitive heavy-handed censorship has finally nudged the giant into ending the censorship of Tsu.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/facebook-lifts-ban-that-blocked-small-rival -tsuco-a6765916.html
Which leads me to believe that Tsu was quietly bought out by Facebook and this former threat to Facebook's monopoly will now be slowly extinguished from the inside.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It will, just as its predecessors did.
"Its so full of misinformation that people take seriously, and these people have children who will grow up to be teachers."
That happens in a lot of places on the Internet. The death of Facebook will do nothing to stop gullible idiots sharing lies with each other. They also use Twitter, Tumblr and a million web forums to do this while Facebook still exists.
"(insert current concern here) could be the start of the fall of civilization as we know it."
...said everyone about something current since civilization began.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
and Sugarhill wants to give for free (with government subsidies) access to his walled garden to the poor third world
interesting...
so WHY would a corrupt third world government be interested in arranging the "free" supply of a filtered version of internet to his ignorant human cattle?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If you don't know what the term means, sure.
"and Sugarhill wants to give for free (with government subsidies) access to his walled garden to the poor third world"
Assuming you mean Mark Zuckerberg (stop with childish names if you want to be taken seriously) - yes, it looks like he wants to set up an actual walled garden system there and that's something he's been roundly criticised for here. Welcome to the party.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Facebook needs to review their policy on what constitutes 'unsafe'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Public Utilities
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Public Utilities
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Public Utilities
In the US, I think such a regulation might run into its own 1st amendment problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Happened with this story also
http://www.npr.org/2015/12/08/458869660/some-muslim-americans-irritated-by-obamas-call-for- them-to-root-out-extremism
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Facebook's control "concerning"?
Wake up and smell the coffee, friend.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Facebook's control "concerning"?
"anything less than far-left fascism"
Is far-right fascism more preferable to your mindset? If not, why make the distinction?
"progressive"
Oh, I see. You're one of the intellectually incurious morons who's been fooled into thinking that progress is bad for some reason. Carry on, then.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Facebook's control "concerning"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Facebook's control "concerning"?
Now, are you interested in discussing the real opinions of people across the political spectrum (yes, spectrum, as in there are many different positions, not binary ones)? Or, are you just another partisan twit who attacks everyone not on their "team" based on fictionalised strawmen?
I have no time for you if you're the latter, but please engage with some adult reasoning behind your statements if you're capable and interested in a conversation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Facebook
[ link to this | view in chronology ]