Facebook removed 800 publishers and accounts and cited them for “consistently broken our rules against spam and coordinated inauthentic behavior.” “People will only share on Facebook if they feel safe and trust the connections they make here.”
The platform says they have removed left and right-leaning websites and can’t particularly say what got removed by numbers. It accused owners of flooding uses with spam that was politically motivated and oriented. Many owners are angry at this overnight action.
The pages that they removed collectively had a weekly reach that was a perceived threat to their preferred candidates and their political agenda.
Dinesh D’Sousa was nailed for making a campaign contribution that was too large $20,000. What is the value of eliminating all dissenting political views from being heard? What is the value of crushing reach on posts that are critical of your candidate and might sway opinion? What is the value of making negative content about your opposition candidate go viral? They help that Facebook just gave to all of their preferred candidates are worth millions of dollars and will certainly impact the election. Facebook has a demonstrated history of these dirty pre-election tactics.
Source: Washington Post
In doing so, Facebook demonstrated its increased willingness to wade into the thorny territory of policing domestic political activity. Some of the accounts had been in existence for years, had amassed millions of followers, and professed support for conservative or liberal ideas, such as one page that billed itself as “the first publication to endorse President Donald J. Trump.” Facebook’s ability to monitor manipulation of users is under an intense spotlight in the weeks ahead of the U.S. midterm elections.
But Facebook only named five of the hundreds of pages it removed. Two of the page operators said that they were legitimate political activists, not profit-driven operators of clickbait “ad farms,” as Facebook claimed in a blog post. They said were still unsure which Facebook rules they had violated or why they had been singled out for behavior that is standard in online organizing.
“I would gladly abide by Facebook’s terms if I understood what they were,” said Chris Metcalf, the publisher of the left-leaning “Reasonable People Unite” which was shut down along with eight additional Facebook pages, which he said had a total of 2.25 million followers. “I am a legitimate political activist. I don’t have a clickbait blog. I don’t have a fake news website. And I haven’t been doing anything that all the other pages in this space aren’t doing.”
In its post, Facebook described the pages, with names like “Nation in Distress” and “Reverb Press,” as largely domestic actors using clickbait headlines and other spam tactics to drive users to websites where they could target them with ads. The company said it was not taking issue with the nature of the content posted by the pages, but with the behaviors of the accounts, which used inappropriate tactics to artificially inflate their influence. Some of the pages and accounts had millions of followers.
Facebook doesn’t have the right.
It enjoys common carrier status, therefore by statute it MUST allow all content, as long as such content is neither profane nor violates any law. Yes, its ‘their servers’ but they enjoy the unfettered use of taxpayer-funded fiber lines, so they must follow the rules everyone else does.
If Facebook wants to police its content based on ideology, then it may NOT enjoy common carrier status and must instead apply for the lesser and more common ‘content provider’ which makes them legally liable for all content on their site, including all submitted user content.
This action is just one more instance of their dirty, fraudulent, criminal activity. Then there are all the fake accounts that they use to help drive advertising metrics and Wall Street reporting numbers. Why hasn’t the Securities and Exchange Commission delved into this yet?
Facebook and Twitter are scared, and they are using Orwellian totalitarian tactics to crush dissenting views because they cannot argue the merits of their positions adequately.
A lot of these pages were run by genuine, real-life friends of mine who worked hard to build them. This wasn’t an attack on fake news. It was an attack on the non-corporate media. Facebook wants to have their cake and eat it too. No can do buddy; no one gets that. Not even Facebook.
If you find inaccurate information within this article, please use the contact form to alert us immediately. Don’t forget to follow the Wayne Dupree Show social media accounts on Facebook, Spreaker, iHeartRadio, Google Plus & Twitter.
Having problems finding a source for real news links in real time, click on Whatfinger.com. Visit, bookmark and share this resource and then tell your friends and family.
Attn: Wayne Dupree is a free speech champion who works tirelessly to bring you news that the mainstream media ignores. But he needs your support in order to keep delivering quality, independent journalism. You can make a huge impact in the war against fake news by pledging as little as $5 per month. Please click here Patreon.com/WDShow to help Wayne battle the fake news media.