There is no way that Facebook enforcement censored these activists “by mistake” and Zuckerberg should not be believed.
Was the censorship and demeaning label that the social media company imposed on pro-Trump activists Diamond and Silk really a Facebook enforcement error, as Mark Zuckerberg claimed? I don’t see how. The couple worked with Facebook to solve the problem and experienced protracted frustration and finally an unappealable verdict that they were “unsafe.”
Indeed, the only reason Diamond and Silk are back in business (assuming Zuckerberg’s promises are kept) is that this was an embarrassing time for Facebook. It literally took an act of Congress to get Facebook to address how Diamond and Silk were mistreated. This duplicates many other cases where the only way to get Facebook to be reasonablt is to hurt their public image by drawing attention to what happened.
Zuckerberg said that “in that specific case, our team made an enforcement error, and we have already gotten in touch with them to reverse it.”
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) asked whether Facebook manipulated algorithms to censor speech, jumping in angrily when Zuckerberg talked about automatically finding and banning terrorist content. “Let me tell you something right now. Diamond and Silk is not terrorism!” she exclaimed.
I’ve already pointed out the threat of Zuckerberg bots censoring speech, but notice that, for now, these algorithms and automated processes basically add another level of plausible deniability. Facebook enforcement is never skewed by a political and social agenda, we are told, but only by a mixture of human and computer error. It is like a small kid being bullied but the bully always claims it was an accident that he bumped into him and made him fall.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com