The post in this screenshot does not violate its "community standards" in any way, but apparently it violated an unwritten standard that you may only post that which is liberal.
I posted this screenshot to the Disdain for Plebs Facebook page. The admin then reposted it. Within an hour, it had 1000 likes and over 400 comments.
After about an hour, it was removed by Facebook. The admin was banned.
A friend of his named Lauren Southern posted screenshots of him saying he got banned, plus the original post that got taken down (pic related). Her post was then taken down and she was banned. Now all she has is her alt account.
It's not just about removing posts. There is also the controversy with the "Trending" news ticker, which everyone knows about by now. Facebook is deliberately using it to influence the millions of people that use its site and manipulate them into thinking things (liberally biased things) are trending that are not, thus causing those people to go, "AHA! So THAT'S what's happening in the world! Those evil conservatives! I'm so progressive!" After a while with those topics inorganically declared as "trending", they actual start to become "trending" through this manipulation of the Facebook userbase.
Now you can argue that this is Facebook's right to censor and manipulate and have a political bias, because they are a private company. This is correct, however it presents a problem.
Virtually everyone has a Facebook. Facebook essentially dominates social media and shapes popular opinion and trends in ways that would make George Orwell turn in his grave. Surely there is now a need in the market that is not being met for a truly open and unbiased universal social networking platform on the same level of popularity as Facebook.
What does Sup Forums think of this? Is there any way to reverse this obviously deliberate social engineering?
Lauren Southern reuploading Disdain for Plebs' original post that was removed
Nicholas Martin
Lauren Southern banned for saying that Disdain for Plebs' admin was banned
Blake Ramirez
how in hell does this violate community standards?
Brody Phillips
I know facebook is under investigation some probably has a link you can send these to. I am not sure.
Aaron Peterson
Why the fuck do people still use this kike's website? After the rainbow profiles I thought for sure they would go
Levi James
Wow they're not even being subtle with this shit anymore Facebook investigated themselves and surprise they found themselves not guilty
Easton Kelly
No I thought I heard congress or the senate was looking into it I remember reading about it. Oh yeah, Facebook investigating themselves of course nothing came of an internal investigation.
Samuel Anderson
As much as I hate that evil Jew Zuckerberg - can someone please explain to me why this is even an issue? Is there any legal basis against what he is doing? Any legal basis that prevents him from fudging what is trending to push liberal agendas?
Connor Young
It's a private entity and it doesn't have to be about free speech. Only a shabbos goy would register into that site under it's own name anyways.
Levi James
No legal basis, but please read the end of the OP again, the problem is that Facebook undoubtedly shapes popular opinion and what the youth and ignorant adults believe. So yes it's their site, but they have a dangerous monopoly on social media and have almost complete control over what the populace will believe. It's why the millenials are obsessed with Sanders and hate Trump. Every other thing in the news ticker talks about how the underdog Sanders is Jesus and Trump is Satan. My main question I guess was if Sup Forums thinks there's any way to reverse/undo/fight this obvious manipulation of the populace.
Dylan Long
Yes but it is a publicly traded company. So what I'm wondering is if it has to adhere to some sort of politically neutral standard?
Colton Fisher
Hi Lauren, that sucks that you got banned. I enjoy triggering my leftist fucktard friends on kikebook by liking your posts
Adam Perez
They claimed that it was an algorithm that determined what stories would get exposure on their site when really it was just employees choosing what they liked. Since most of their employees are, as one article put it, "Ivy League 20 somethings who lean left", right leaning stories were ignored.
Benjamin Young
>the problem is that Facebook undoubtedly shapes popular opinion what do you mean by this?
Aaron Martinez
Ha, this flies right in the face of everything Facebook has been saying the past few days about being "open and balanced".
Yes it's their right to be biased, but to then claim that you're not unbiased? Stuff like this could really hurt their reputation at such a critical time when the media is scrutinizing them for allegations of censorship.
David Garcia
Reminder
Gavin Brown
I get that. I'm asking if there is any legal basis from disallowing them to do this.
Obviously Facebook has a dangerous monopoly on the minds of the internet-browsing public. But there isn't really much that can be done about a private company doing that unless we decide to make laws against it.
It seems there is a double standard though as the government can force a lady to make cake for gay marriage, but can't force publicly traded companies to practice political neutrality.
Owen Baker
False advertising.
They claim their trending stories and moderation are done by an impartial algorithm, which is clearly not the case.
Matthew Martinez
>butthurt conservitards your tears are delicious
Mason Brown
their product, their terms
feel free to make your own faceberg
Brayden Lewis
But how did any of these posts violate their terms?
Jackson Martin
facebook is a corporation and and does not have to answer to any government mandated 'fairness doctrine.'
if rush limbaugh doesn't have to give liberal views equal time on his platform, neither does zuck, just because he reaches more people. free market at work, bitches
Caleb Gomez
By your logic, whites and Christian business owners should be able to discriminate against fags and niggers. Glad you agree.
Jackson Hughes
why would you be asking me
Jason Carter
>Yes but it is a publicly traded company. So what I'm wondering is if it has to adhere to some sort of politically neutral standard?
boy are you stupid
Easton Price
Glenn Beck said they're not guilty too
Leo Gonzalez
who said i don't
Robert Morris
>It's okay when our side does it!
The attitude of every liberal fascist
Grayson Wilson
>getting surprised that leftists are fucking crazy >2016
Cooper Rogers
This is the fair outcome.
Hudson Thomas
Meanwhile muslims pages that promotr sharia law abd therefore women treated like property, arent banned at all.
Luis Rodriguez
>It's okay when our side does it!
thats literally the reason a conservative made this thread
Chase Reyes
>their product, their terms >feel free to make your own faceberg It's going to have to be regulated like telephones. You can't have telephone companies listening to your phone calls and censoring anything they don't like.
If nothing is done to stop them Americans will end up with less free speech than the average soviet citizen as the majority of communication moves to the internet.
Adam Wood
a publicly traded company could openly support hitler if it wanted to, and the government couldn't do shit about it.
shareholders and public opinion may step in and censor thru financial sanctions
Jayden Collins
But government isn't the only solution. The truth is that a majority of people in the world only believe what they're told to believe. If enough people are exposed to this truth, and how everything is just manipulated, then that would create the market demand for a truly open and unbiased social network site
Nolan Flores
>less free speech than the average soviet citizen
You might as well have said European citizen, at this rate
Grayson Ramirez
free speech has nothing to do with someones private property
Justin Garcia
America thinks it is free but we are actually pretty regulated. The government just does it in a very roundabout way into fooling people they have more freedom than they do. People will spout off about "muh red white n blue" in general but then when you bring up specific topics they will agree our government is fucked - they just can't put the pieces together.
Alexander Gutierrez
>worries about loss of free speech >advocates for government regulation of free speech on a public platform
are all conservatives this stupid, or just aussie ones?
Christopher Brown
Just deleted my kikebook account.
I feel so liberated now. Though I'm sure I'm gonna hear all kinds of garbage from friends and family, at which point I'll tell them the truth.
"I have very good reason to suspect Facebook may be misusing their application for nefarious purposes. I will not be party to such abuse of power."
Lucas Baker
Should let trump know man he'll fix it by next week
Jacob Powell
Congress can investigate what ever they want, and you have to answer there questions truthfully or go to jail. They do have the power to make laws prohibiting what Facebook is doing.
Kayden Kelly
Why does everyone think that government would be the only solution to this? Hell if enough people with tech skills got pissed off at this, they could get together and develop their own unbiased Facebook, call it Openbook or some shit. Make a whole gay SJW campaign about free speech, start a gofundme or kickstarter. Who knows, could catch on, especially with Trump and the alt-right helping the pendulum in America to swing just a little bit more towards conservatism.
Isaiah Richardson
Ignorant adults and youth have always been a problem, I guess you could say the same about Sup Forums and how it shapes opinions because there are people in here who only rely on infographs and meme alt-right news sites for their news and information. Just make people realize that using Facebook is retarded and maybe people stop visiting the site, should happen eventually with this kind of shit happening.
Jason Flores
>They do have the power to make laws prohibiting what Facebook is doing.
are you sure about that
Jose Sullivan
This is how freedom of speech will be destroyed here.
Michael Cooper
well, you are right about that, so get to work on creating one
Nathan Taylor
But they don't have to stop doing what they're currently doing, if it's in their interests to sculpt people into good goyim then that's up to them. I don't see how any laws can prevent that from happening, it's a private company after all.
Blake Gutierrez
just mangle the english language. they filter post with a search engine. they dont have the man power to watch everything in real time and remove it
so key words are important. use new euphemisms and garble words. while i am sure they are up to date on acronyms commonly used i doubt they think lolcat is relevant. just take that to the next level
you = yew (like the wood) but could also be yuhew or replace it entirely with dat boi so instead of talking about some black guy you are referring to the person you are talking with it changes the meaning when read
Jeremiah Thompson
I'll wear your skin faggot.
Brayden Powell
Elaborate
Luis White
>Why does everyone think that government would be the only solution to this? Hell if enough people with tech skills got pissed off at this, they could get together and develop their own unbiased Facebook, call it Openbook or some shit. Make a whole gay SJW campaign about free speech, start a gofundme or kickstarter. Who knows, could catch on, especially with Trump and the alt-right helping the pendulum in America to swing just a little bit more towards conservatism.
yeah, so why isn't this happening? the free market has no demand for it, or else it would exist, according to conservative philosophy
Matthew King
As one who subscribes to Kikebook just to see what normies think about the world. This angers me greatly, but as a person who supports corporations to do whatever the fuck they want.. I'm conflicted. I do want to know HOW it violates their standards though. If Zuckerberg were to come out and say, "I don't like that. So you're banned for saying it." I'd be much more fine with this because it is HIS corporation ultimately. To inform you all though, last month the snapchat "dog" filter was being reported in mass by some trolls. You'd think it wouldn't do anything right, but it was found as tits and nudity and the reported victim was banned for a time. What's interesting though is there is no picture that can be misconstrued in this content. There are simply words. Recently, the algorithm must've been reformatted in order to include conservative posts, or posts in support of Trump to be censored because dog filters no longer get a person banned. Regardless of the situation, I'll be quitting this site, but only after seeing the consequences of this as the Pleb page is fairly known throughout facebook. Let us keep our ears to the ground friends.
Owen Martinez
Important monopolies get absorbed by the government. It happened to power and water, it happened to Telcos, and it happened to the British East India company. It's time for Facebook to be nationalised, in my opinion. Not total control, but an independent board of directors with a clear mission and no shareholders to be accountable to.
You're right, OP. Social media controls in private hands is worrying. Power should only be wielded by democratically elected, and accountable, institutions. Facebook has power, ergo it ought to lose it's freedom.
Adam Moore
You did good, user. You did the right thing.
Tyler Bell
yeah civil rights act just make conservative a protected class
they should at least threaten it
Anthony Flores
Who gives a shit. You conservatards are just getting a taste of your own bullshit lol go bible thump or go on yahoo answers
Jace Campbell
This would be kinda cool. If their campaign got big enough, and if they pandered to just the right groups and kissed their asses, they could receive some major donations like money or equipment. Imagine a truly open social network site all about free speech, endorsed by Ron Paul or even Trump. Just market it as "liberty" or "the free speech alternative".
Anthony Bennett
Op isn't Lauren
Brayden Baker
Look up former Facebook employee interviews. Facebook made blm famous. They arbitrarily take down posts, and can inject whatever they are paid to into the trending section.
Carter Cooper
I literally feel better already, one less niggling internet entity vying for my attention and in-box space.
I never got into Facebook at all really, so what I did was more or less a formality.
Nathaniel Reyes
The government won't technically censor free speech but every company will so it's basically the same fucking thing.
Charles Williams
>Why does everyone think that government would be the only solution to this? Hell if enough people with tech skills got pissed off at this, they could get together and develop their own unbiased Facebook, call it Openbook or some shit. Make a whole gay SJW campaign about free speech, start a gofundme or kickstarter. Who knows, could catch on, especially with Trump and the alt-right helping the pendulum in America to swing just a little bit more towards conservatism. It won't work, what happens when the majority of communication takes place on electronic private property? The free market won't fix it because censorship will always be more profitable.
Also the government likely helped FB get it's near monopoly in exchange to intelligence data, they shouldn't really be considered a completely private entity.
Lucas Murphy
i would love to see this attempt
Xavier Wilson
i guess Sup Forums shouldn't have supported companies controlling every aspect of your life
reap what you sow
Jaxson Reed
Imagine the mocking
>HAHAHA it's conservabook so silly lol!
Christopher Jones
thats funny I constantly post trump shit trolling normies on kikebook and I haven't had anything removed at all.
Samuel Fisher
go back to neogaf idiot
Logan Allen
If conservatives are so incensed and/or so numerous wouldn't organization of a boycott, the flooding of complaint boxes, general Alinskyisms be more useful than grumbling about how there ought to be a law. You don't want Zuckerberg accountable to the law! He's a jew! You have to keep him honest your own damn self. He should provide the algorithm he says he has instead of collegefags being his algorithm.
Gabriel James
yeah, they would just have to be careful how they marketed it. Maybe distance themselves from Trump I guess, or make a big deal about being unbiased and unpolitical and post stuff like in the OP to show people the problem and why there's a need for their new open social network where everyone gets a say no matter who they are or what they believe. Just market it like that, paint everyone as the victim whether they're conservative or not, tell them there are things they're not allowed to say, "But on our site we don't care what your political affiliation is!" Just adhere to similar community standards to keep the site family friendly so the site doesn't become stigmatized as neo-nazi or a child porn haven.
Kayden Ross
lol you think I support this bullshit? I'm double uncucked faggot, so shut the duck you faggot,.
Robert Stewart
>general Alinskyisms
Henry Ross
conservative facebook has been tried and failed miserably like most other conservative ideas.
anyone remember reaganbook?
the free market does not want your stupid ideology
Eli Evans
yes he is stupid for wondering that
but it is wise to move toward such a discrimination protection codified by the government
"may not discriminate nor censor in any way at any time in any place or digital medium based on political views, beliefs, statements, or affiliations"
Eli Harris
>tfw no (You)s for my effort post
Wyatt Rivera
Take off your name, moron. Namefags get you (You)s.
Nicholas Martin
noooo you are missing the point, not a conservative facebook but just a social network where this kind of shit doesn't happen. Where people are allowed to have whatever political beliefs they want and not have them censored, but still be a part of a huge worldwide social network versus some obscure site that hardly anyone uses.
Cameron Williams
>look! The hammer is gonna hurt if I smash it against my face >proceeds to smash face >ouch why does it hurt??
Stop using kikebook and become an winrar
Brody Turner
here's your (You), friend. Keep the faith
Wyatt Fisher
>If conservatives are so incensed and/or so numerous wouldn't organization of a boycott, the flooding of complaint boxes, general Alinskyisms be more useful than grumbling about how there ought to be a law. You don't want Zuckerberg accountable to the law! He's a jew! You have to keep him honest your own damn self. He should provide the algorithm he says he has instead of collegefags being his algorithm. There's no way anyone can compete with FB, they control the majority of communication in the developed world, their ability to influence populations is unprecedented. There's not even any corporate accountability, Zuck has a dual class share setup where he controls the majority of votes despite owning only a small percentage of the company.
Their monopoly must either be dismantled or they will have to be regulated somehow.
Does the USA have any laws regarding trying to subvert democracy?
Gavin Brown
kek i got banned for saying that trannies are mentally ill. it was a fake name account so i dont give a shit. goybook is shit
Daniel Scott
Very true. Conservatives just don't understand- no one is interested in their backwards thinking bullshit. Including the free market.
Thomas Williams
>Things that I don't agree with shouldn't exist >He believes differently than me, he shouldn't be able to do that
Cooper Watson
noooo you are missing the point. The only reason this is coming up is because it's going against conservatives. If it were the other way around, this thread wouldn't even exist and conservatives wouldn't care because their "truth" is being fed to millions. Quit the bullshit. It's like that "both political parties suck" bullshit.
Easton Harris
...
Henry Torres
No, that would be illegal, as much as I despise Zuckercuck, it's well within the law, as Facebook is a private entity, what we can do is bring this to light, or create a service better than Facebook, to compete with it.
Jack Phillips
well, you tell me then, why doesn't it exist already? there is literally nothing stopping it from being created
Bentley Butler
maybe something like this, or further deliberate censorships brought to light, revealed to the public on a massive scale, could be the start of that.
Nathaniel Watson
I'm not the one saying the government should pass laws or regulate facebook, you conservatards are (see above). I'm just saying the general public doesn't give a fuck about your redneck ideology.
Camden Diaz
do you not see the irony in that
Grayson Stewart
tfw when now you finally understand how the free market works. if there was more demand for your posting, you would have gotten more than this one pity reply
Nolan Kelly
He's right, Alinsky style tactics would work, the communists have been fighting dirty since their inception, and Sup Forums took off the gloves a long time ago, we just have to aim at the right target.
Logan Morales
There already is one, "freedombook" a conservative social media that no one gives a fuck about lol
Charles Ramirez
>liberals are oppressed
is this guy for real?
Carson King
That's just scratching the surface. It's old news, but...
Only a dishonest person would fear to hear the truth.
Daniel Adams
The Oreo and the Chick Fil A.
Julian Parker
there is no irony in that
there is no reason for everyone to not be allowed a say. If they're wrong, evil, retarded, or all three, they will just be ignored and stigmatized by society.
If you're none of those three, you have nothing to fear and can voice your opinion. What's so hard about that for libcucks to grasp? If your ideology is so great then why do you have to hide behind censorship and smear tactics, calling anyone who disagrees with you a racist/sexist/whatever-ist to silence them?
Dylan Watson
you sound like a fucking communist, mate. stop trying to smash the printing presses because a newspaper isn't pandering to your warped ideology
aussies are usually cool as shit. are u a chink or russian expat or something