Share This Article with a Friend!


Mr. Zuckerberg, Who Is The Facebook “Community”?

On the eve of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and a joint session of the Senate Judiciary and Commerce committees, the pro-Trump internet Mark Zuckerbergsensations Diamond and Silk announced they have been identified as “unsafe to the community” by Facebook’s content monitors.

The news broke in a tweet from the YouTube stars that posted Friday evening, we will unpack the thread so you can get the whole picture and timeline:

[email protected] have been corresponding since September 7, 2017, with @facebook (owned by Mark Zuckerberg), about their bias censorship and discrimination against D&S brand page.  Finally after several emails, chats, phone calls, appeals, beating around the bush, lies, and...

And:

... giving us the run around, Facebook gave us another bogus reason why Millions of people who have liked and/or followed our page no longer receives notification and why our page, post and video reach was reduced by a very large percentage. Here is the reply from...

...Facebook. Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 3:40 PM: "The Policy team has came to the conclusion that your content and your brand has been determined unsafe to the community."  Yep, this was FB conclusion after 6 Months, 29 days, 5 hrs, 40 minutes and 43 seconds. Oh and guess what else...

Now here’s the most outrageous part:

...Facebook said:  "This decision is final and it is not appeal-able in any way." (Note: This is the exact wording that FB emailed to us.)

So our questions to Facebook (Mark Zuckerberg) are:

1. What is unsafe about two Blk-women supporting the @POTUS @realDonaldTrump?

2...

...Our FB page has been created since December 2014, when exactly did the content and the brand become unsafe to the community?

3. When you say "community" are you referring to the Millions who liked and followed our page?

4.  What content on our page was in violation? 

5....

And:

...If our content and brand was so unsafe to the community, why is the option for us to boost our content and spend money with FB to enhance our brand page still available?  Maybe FB should give us a refund since FB censored our reach.

6...

...Lastly, didn't FB violate their own policy when FB stopped sending notifications to the Millions of people who liked and followed our brand page?

This is deliberate bias censorship and discrimination. These tactics are unacceptable and we want answers!

~Diamond and Silk pic.twitter.com/wQqtub8Ges

As our friends over at the Twitchy website blared in their headline on this latest case of Silicon Valley bias against conservatives: We want ANSWERS!

And in particular we want to know who constitutes the Facebook “community”?

Is it the unaccountable liberal snowflakes working in some Silicon Valley cube farm who made this decision?

Is it the millions of non-political individuals who just want a way to share pictures, and catch-up on their high school and college friends?

Is it the thousands, if not millions of businesses, small and large, that have found ways to monetize their presence on the platform – and pay to advertise to its users?

Or is it D list “celebrities” like Michael Rapaport who have used the platform to call President Trump every vulgar name in the book, refer to critics as “shitbox” and still have not been “determined unsafe to the community”?

Or is the Obama administration and other Far-Left Democrats who enabled Facebook's near-monopoly of social media?

National Review’s Editor Rich Lowry said recently, “The issue is that Facebook has a tremendous amount of data and there’s one man who makes the decision about how it’s used and that’s Mark Zuckerberg…” We hate to disagree with our friend Rich, but he was far too narrow in his analysis.

The issue isn’t merely that Facebook has a tremendous amount of data; it is that Facebook has a tremendous amount of market power that it is using in an arbitrary manner to influence everything from politics to consumer behavior.

With no accountability, and apparent immunity from the usual commercial rules of equal access and non-discrimination, Facebook decides who is in and who is out of its “community” and who can monetize their presence on the platform and who cannot.  It is time Congress made it clear through legislation that the rules that apply to any other commercial enterprise apply to Facebook and that discrimination of any sort will not be allowed.

Share this

CENSORSHIP AND THE INTERNET

I Watched Diamond and Silk on FOX over the weekend and agree with them completely.
*
When a company does business, they have no right to pick and choose who they will do business with based on ones political views.
*
This is unlike the issue of whether a baker has the right not to bake cakes for homosexual marriages based on a religious belief. What Facebook is doing is censoring the political views of the public at large. If FACEBOOK agrees with your views you get on, if they do not agree with you, you get blocked.
*
We have been traveling a very dangerous road in the area of political censorship for a long time. We see corporations who have never had any experience with providing news purchasing news papers and magazines in order to control the political dialogue and now we see corporations like FACEBOOK, Twitter etc. attempting to block free speech of those who have a differing view than those who control the content of these corporations.
*
Censorship by private corporations is no less dangerous than censorship by the government.