>Over the weekend, we were surprised to learn that some readers were prevented by Facebook when attempting to share Zero Hedge articles. Subsequently it emerged that virtually every attempt to share or merely mention an article, including in private messages, would be actively blocked by the world's largest social network, with the explanation that "the link you tried to visit goes against our community standards."
>We were especially surprised by this action as neither prior to this seemingly arbitrary act of censorship, nor since, were we contacted by Facebook with an explanation of what "community standard" had been violated or what particular filter or article had triggered the blanket rejection of all Zero Hedge content.
>To be sure, as a for-profit enterprise with its own unique set of corporate "ethics", Facebook has every right to impose whatever filters it desires on the media shared on its platform. It is entirely possible that one or more posts was flagged by Facebook's "triggered" readers who merely alerted a censorship algo which blocked all content.
>Alternatively, it is just as possible that Facebook simply decided to no longer allow its users to share our content in retaliation for our extensive coverage of what some have dubbed the platform's "many problems", including chronic privacy violations, mass abandonment by younger users, its gross and ongoing misrepresentation of fake users, ironically - in retrospect - its systematic censorship and back door government cooperation (those are just links from the past few weeks).
>Unfortunately, as noted above, we still don't know what event precipitated this censorship, and any attempts to get feedback from the company with the $500 billion market cap, have so far remained unanswered.
>We would welcome this opportunity to engage Facebook in a constructive dialog over the company's decision to impose a blanket ban on Zero Hedge content. Alternatively, we will probably not lose much sleep if that fails to occur: unlike other websites, we are lucky in that only a tiny fraction of our inbound traffic originates at Facebook, with most of our readers arriving here directly without the aid of search engines (Google banned us from its News platform, for reasons still unknown, shortly after the Trump victory) or referrals.
>That said, with Facebook increasingly under political, regulatory and market scrutiny for its arbitrary internal decisions on what content to promote and what to snuff, its ever declining user engagement, and its soaring content surveillance costs, such censorship is hardly evidence of the platform's "openness" to discourse, its advocacy of free speech, or its willingness to listen to and encourage non-mainstream opinions, even if such "discourse" takes place in some fake user "click farm" somewhere in Calcutta.
>as a private company Facebook has the right to pee pee poo poo Fucks sakes. Do free-speech fetishists ever get tired of cucking for corporations that hate them?
Jonathan Martinez
It makes sense for them to say this, as their conscience can be clear when the hammer of regulation finally drops and they can credibly say "You brought this on yourselves."
how is this a surprise? see any list with domains, zh has been fake news'd for a while
Mason Rogers
If you are actually for free speech, you won't be for corporations fucking you. Let's clear this up right now: the "right wing" is basically capitalists and conservatives with everyone basically being a different flavour of the two.
Capitalists like: -censorship and manipulation -global markets -removal of safety regulations -mass migration Hell, capitalists don't even stick to their ideals of working hard = monetary reward, because they put every obstacle in the working man's way so this doesn't happen. Capitalists use government in the same way that communists use it - they are cancer. Conservatives are ideologically opposed to everything on that list.
Luke Morales
FACBOOK IS TRYING TO ACT LIKE A GOVERNING BODY YOU NEED TO BOYCOT ITS SUPERSEDING OUR STRUCTURE OF LAW.
Ryan Roberts
>exiting the echo chamber earns you scorn from those within The lack of self awareness in this post is impressive, even by Jow Forums standards.
capatilism idealogy doesnt include "monopolies" you just talked about monopolies in an unfair way you nigger.
the reason for the immigration isnt for cheap work labor. god damnit or whatever other stupid shit you justpulled out of your ass but also squeezed it by your head that was up there too
its fucking cause they print more money with more population This is well known and you guys don't stop spamming this bullshit all the time
Wyatt Cook
This is the final form of capitalism. You can't magically keep it at the starting point forever and hope nobody goes in for more beneficial arrangements with governments. Libertarians need to fucking grow up.
Capitalists aren't nationalists. Conservatives actually are nationalists. Capitalists are happy outsourcing money and jobs, which never come back to the citizens of a country. Capitalists = globalists. Every two bit company did the outsourcing thing and imported cheap foreign workers while it was available.
Isaiah Diaz
>Facebook isn't an ecochamber of pozzed feminists, boomers and narcissistic retards
Jow Forums is the most shilled & thus the most diverse market place of ideas on the planet.
kikebook is a jew owned intel gathering orwellian shit hole. only cucks use it.
Kayden Nelson
Ah, monopolies aren't REAL capitalism. Where have I heard that argument before?
And printing money somehow causes mass outsourcing, mass immigration, monopolies? Are you trying to say that immigration is so they can print more money? Are you fucking retarded?
Joshua Brooks
So glad I deleted my faceberg a year ago. My only regret was having one in the first place.
Ian Hughes
yea godamnit every person alive equals more printed money
how do you think they have decided to print out this fake value currency you idiot. go on want to hear your bullshit no i dont i just told you to stfu cause what you just said was stupid.
monopolies arent capatlism and you think this is a joke?
i cant even idk even know. no man just running and fucking up everything is completely fucking legit. and not communism
please you little fuckign nigger tell me how communism is everybody goes along with it.
nobody, will ever go along with it. and its just welfare in essence for 1 rich person 1 person will control it and take advantage of it fully. the more the 1 person controls it the more you think its communism but you ridea is everybody goes along with it and as i said, 1 person controls it so you will never get it and you also never stfu or make a point
Gab and Minds. I don't use either though. Just 4chins for me.
Mason Johnson
i made one but they never let me confirm my email address of [email protected]
so i lost my account
Evan Hughes
>"Facebook isn't an ecochamber of pozzed feminists, boomers and narcissistic retards" The point is that it is, you fucking moron. And it has billions of users, so we should use it and its ilk to spread information to casuals. By banning Zerohedge and others (((Facebook))) effectively shut that down. Just in time for the 2020 election season coverage as well. I don't know how someone could miss the point by this much without it being deliberate.
Without government support, monopolies are unstable. They all start behaving like this, and people stop using them. Facebook will fail and be replaced. It may not be fast enough for your ADHD of course.
Jayden Hernandez
>using facebook, twitter etc. your own fault.
The only thing pretty much without alternative atm is Youtube due to share amount of content, but if it`ll contineu direction it goes - it`d just be replaced by something more open inevitably
Dominic Morales
Theres Bitchute. All the alternatives lack a vast network and thus content, but the content they do have is uncucked.
