Some countries, especially in Asia, are thinking about the influence of Facebook in politics. They fear it's being used by powerful detractors for campaign.
Some countries, especially in Asia, are thinking about the influence of Facebook in politics. They fear it's being used by powerful detractors for campaign.
When you open a thread, please refer to sources.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/29/b...ilippines.html
Is this the one??
MANILA — President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines is one of a number of populists around the world who rose to power in part by harnessing Facebook to get his unfiltered messages to millions. During Mr. Duterte’s 2016 campaign, his allies flooded the social media platform with misinformation about his opponents and laudatory stories about him.
Four years later, after allegations that Facebook aided disruptive misinformation campaigns in many countries, the Silicon Valley giant has put up increasing checks on what politicians and their allies can say online. And Mr. Duterte is not pleased.
In his weekly public address on Monday, Mr. Duterte lashed out at Facebook for taking down fake accounts that supported his policies, making vague threats to shut the platform down in the Philippines.
“I allow you to operate here,” Mr. Duterte said. “You cannot bar or prevent me from espousing the objectives of government. Is there life after Facebook? I don’t know. But we need to talk.”
It was the latest reminder that the populists Facebook has empowered can turn quickly on the platform. The American social network has come under increasing pressure to grapple with the influence it gives to sowers of disinformation, be they Russian agents seeking to influence U.S. elections or military forces stirring ethnic hatred.
Yet even as it seeks to police those in power, better relations with leaders like Mr. Duterte are — in the short run, at least — better for Facebook’s bottom line.
The company said last week that it had taken down two networks, one based in China and one in the Philippines, that used fake accounts to post information about a variety of subjects, including Philippine politics. It said both networks had misled users about their identities.
The Philippine network had ties to the military and the police, the company said. It showed examples of memes the network had posted that criticized Communist insurgents in the Philippines, as well as progressive activist groups.
This is not the social network’s first tangle with a strongman. In recent years, Facebook has found itself in a series of standoffs with populist and authoritarian leaders. The quarrels have centered on questions that now bedevil the company ahead of the November presidential election in the United States: Who should decide what counts as misinformation, and when should it be taken down?
It is a thorny issue that the company has been hesitant to address head-on. Although it is assembling a board to oversee content moderation, Facebook has outsourced much of the day-to-day oversight. In Southeast Asia, harsh political realities have pushed its limits and occasionally forced its hand.
In Thailand in 2017, it faced the threat of a ban over content that the government said violated l?se-majest? laws. In Myanmar, where posts helped to encourage ethnic cleansing, Facebook blocked the country’s most powerful military official.
Mr. Duterte’s complaints are akin to ones made in recent years by President Trump, who has accused social media platforms of anticonservative bias, and whose agencies are now pursuing an antitrust case against Facebook. Despite Mr. Trump’s claims, data tools regularly show that the most-read political content on Facebook in the United States comes from right-wing voices.
While many of the tough-talking Mr. Duterte’s threats come to nothing, Mr. Trump may have provided him with a precedent of sorts for dealing with Facebook.
Mr. Trump’s push to ban the Chinese apps TikTok and WeChat from the United States could embolden other leaders to erect internet blocks of their own, when it is politically expedient to do so. As it plays a major role in the polarized politics of countries around the world, Facebook may well see more threats like Mr. Duterte’s.
In his address on Monday, Mr. Duterte accused Facebook of opposing his policies and supporting the Philippine left. He said that the company had “opened a Pandora’s box” and that his government might respond with tougher regulations.
Continue reading the main story
“We allow you to operate here hoping that you could help us also,” he said. “Now, if the government cannot espouse or advocate something which is for the good of the people, then what is your purpose here in my country?”
ImageMaria Ressa, co-founder of the news site Rappler, last week in Quezon City, the Philippines. Rappler helped bring the fake accounts to Facebook’s attention, the company said.
Maria Ressa, co-founder of the news site Rappler, last week in Quezon City, the Philippines. Rappler helped bring the fake accounts to Facebook’s attention, the company said.Credit...Aaron Favila/Associated Press
Facebook executives in the Philippines declined to comment. In its statement last week, the company said it had shut down the networks because of their “coordinated inauthentic behavior,” not the content of the posts.
Mr. Duterte’s threats against Facebook were a striking turnaround for a president who has reaped considerable benefit from the platform. Before he won the 2016 election, running as a belligerent populist, fake accounts on Facebook spread positive stories about him and inflammatory attacks on his opponents, many of them untrue.
Since he took office, misinformation on Facebook — some of it shared openly by his aides — has been used to slander his critics and promote Mr. Duterte’s policies, including his bloody war on drugs. In March last year, Facebook suspended 200 accounts linked to Nic Gabunada, the social media manager of Mr. Duterte’s 2016 campaign, also for “coordinated inauthentic activity.”
In its statement last week, Facebook said the Philippine network appeared to have escalated its activity in 2019 and 2020. It posted in Filipino and English about Philippine news, including domestic politics, antiterrorism legislation and the military’s activities against terrorism, the company said.
The China-based network posted in Chinese, Filipino and English, focusing most of its activity in Southeast Asia, the company said. It posted about Philippine politics, including material supportive of Mr. Duterte and his daughter, who is said to be weighing a presidential run in 2022. But it also posted on global topics, including China’s activity in the South China Sea, where it has territorial disputes with the Philippines.
The Chinese network also posted content aimed at influencing the American presidential election, though Facebook said the network devoted little focus to that effort and had gained “almost no following” in the United States.
Continue reading the main story
Mr. Duterte and his officials did not appear to dispute that the military was involved in the Philippine-based network. He denounced Facebook for taking down the posts backing the military’s campaign against the country’s long-running Communist insurgency.
“You know, Facebook, insurgency is about overturning the government,” Mr. Duterte said. “What would be the point of allowing you to continue if you cannot help us? We are not advocating mass destruction. We are not advocating mass massacre. It’s a fight of ideas.”
On Tuesday, the military issued a statement saying Facebook “could be the medium that will help consolidate people’s support to their armed forces as their true protectors and defenders of the state against its enemies.”
A spokesman for Mr. Duterte, Harry Roque, said the government considered Facebook’s move “a form of censorship,” adding, “We are not conceding these are fake accounts.”
Facebook said the Philippine network had been brought to its attention by civil society groups and by Rappler, an independent news site that has helped Facebook identify misinformation.
Mr. Duterte has issued threats against executives at Rappler and at the broadcast network ABS-CBN, both of which have been at the forefront of reporting about his drug war. Rappler’s co-founder Maria Ressa was convicted in June of libeling a businessman by alleging that he had ties to the drug underworld, and she still faces several other charges, including tax evasion. Ms. Ressa, who is free on bail, has denied all of the charges, calling them attempts by the government to silence her.
ABS-CBN has been effectively shut down, with the House of Representatives, dominated by allies of Mr. Duterte, having refused to renew its broadcast license. Its beleaguered chairman stepped down last week.
Continue reading the main story
Danilo Arao, an associate professor of journalism at the state-run University of the Philippines, said the president’s comments Monday had made it clear that social media companies now risked official retaliation along with government critics.
“With Duterte, anything is possible, so there is a need to be vigilant,” Mr. Arao said. He said the president’s “tirade against Facebook” was ironic, given its role in his rise to power.
Sorry bout that. I was reading randomly the other day, and yeah @JohnLanders (thank you), that's one of the articles I saw initially and then I was linked to different artciles where apparently Facebook has been banned to several countries already. If you think about it, FB has a lot of power over everyone, and it's really hard to tell the authenticity of what's posted on it (well pretty much every site for that matter).Originally Posted by StarrySky87
https://www.indexoncensorship.org/20...cebook-banned/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/nichola.../#3f6b52dc292b
Facebook is removing all accounts across its platforms affiliated with the right-wing QAnon conspiracy theory, the boldest step after months of cracking down on the pro-Trump group the FBI has warned are “conspiracy theory-driven domestic terrorists.”
All Facebook pages, groups and Instagram accounts representing QAnon will be removed, even if they do not contain violent content, Facebook announced in a news release Tuesday.
The QAnon conspiracy theory, which claims a “deep state” plot against President Donald Trump and his supporters by a global cabal of sex traffickers looking to create a New World Order, has grown in popularity recently.
Republican candidate Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has openly promoted the conspiracy in the past, appears to be a shoo-in to win a U.S. Congressional seat from her northern Georgia district, while Trump himself has refused to disavow QAnon.
Facebook said it has removed more than 1,500 pages and groups representing QAnon since Aug. 19, when it announced efforts to disrupt QAnon’s ability to organize using its platforms.
In the past, Facebook had only banned QAnon content that discussed potential violence, but said Tuesday that there were “several issues that led to today’s update.”
PROMOTED
Grads of Life BRANDVOICE | Paid Program
No, Putting A Person Of Color On Your Panel Doesn’t Accomplish “Diversity”
UNICEF USA BRANDVOICE | Paid Program
Young Activists Stand Up For Justice At Black Lives Matter Protests
Civic Nation BRANDVOICE | Paid Program
Making The Case: The Role Of Faculty In Student Voter Engagement
CRITICAL QUOTE
“For example, while we’ve removed QAnon content that celebrates and supports violence, we’ve seen other QAnon content tied to different forms of real world harm, including recent claims that the west coast wildfires were started by certain groups, which diverted attention of local officials from fighting the fires and protecting the public,” Facebook said in a statement.
KEY BACKGROUND
The QAnon conspiracy has quickly spread online, after first appearing on the 4chan message board in 2017. It promotes the existence of a “deep state” in control of American society, and has claimed that figures like Dr. Anthony Fauci are actors in the deep state plot. Attendees of Trump rallies are regularly seen wearing shirts and holding signs that are supportive of QAnon, which the FBI warned in a memo last year contained followers that were “conspiracy theory-driven domestic terrorists.”
Wait, are you using two different usernames? Did you post the thread under Headstenab?
ETA: I just looked and saw that both usernames are you. You can't have multiple accounts to post. I am going to ban the old one and you can continue using the new one.
Last edited by raisedbywolves; 10-08-2020 at 06:40 AM.
Busted.
Happy Birthday! I hid a dead body in your backyard to celebrate. Good luck finding it under the cement. You can only use a stick to look for it.
https://fox40.com/news/business/face...isinformation/
Facebook ban is based on this.
Facebook is facing its toughest challenge yet: an election complicated by a pandemic, a deeply divided nation lured by conspiracy theories and alternate versions of reality. Is it ready? Here are some of the biggest steps and missteps it’s taken in the fight against misinformation since 2016.
Nov. 10, 2016: Days after the election of President Donald Trump, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg calls the idea that “fake news” on Facebook had influenced the election “a pretty crazy idea.” He later walks back the comment.
December 2016: Facebook says it will hire third-party fact-checkers to combat misinformation.
April 27, 2017: Facebook publicly acknowledges that governments or other malicious non-state actors are using its social network to influence national elections, in line with U.S. government findings of Russian interference.
October 2017: Facebook says ads linked to a Russian internet agency were seen by an estimated 10 million people before and after the 2016 election.
November 2017: Ahead of congressional hearings on election interference, Facebook ups that estimate, saying Russian ads fomenting political division potentially reached as many as 126 million users.
Jan. 4, 2018: Zuckerberg declares his 2018 resolution is to “fix” Facebook.
March 2018: Evidence grows that Facebook campaigns were used to steer the U.K. toward Brexit.
April 2018: Zuckerberg testifies before Congress and apologizes for the company’s missteps, as well as fake news, hate speech, a lack of data privacy and foreign interference in the 2016 elections on his platform.
May 2018: Democrats on the House intelligence committee release more than 3,500 Facebook ads created or promoted by a Russian internet agency before and after the 2016 election.
July 2018: British lawmakers call for greater oversight of Facebook and other platforms.
July 2018: After Facebook warns of skyrocketing expenses due in part to beefing up security and hiring more moderators, its stock price suffers the worst drop in its history. Its shares don’t recover until January 2020.
Sept. 5, 2018: Facebook and Twitter executives pledge before Congress to defend against foreign intrusion.
October 2018: Facebook invites the press to tour a newly created “war room” for combating election-related misinformation in what is largely seen as a public relations move.
October-November 2018: Ahead of the 2018 U.S. midterm election, Facebook removes hundreds of accounts, pages and groups for suspected links to foreign election interference.
Feb. 18, 2019: In a scathing report, British lawmakers call for a mandatory code of ethics and independent overseers for social media platforms, specifically calling out Facebook for a technical design that seems to “conceal knowledge of and responsibility for specific decisions.”
May 2019: Facebook declines to remove a video manipulated to show House Speaker Nancy Pelosi slurring her words. The altered clip is shared millions of times.
October 2019: Facebook unveils new security systems designed to prevent foreign interference in elections.
November 2019: Facebook opens a new misinformation “war room” ahead of U.K. elections.
May-June 2020: Facebook declines to remove Trump posts that suggest protesters in Minneapolis could be shot. Zuckerberg defends his decision in a Facebook post. Facebook also declines to take action on two Trump posts spreading misinformation about voting by mail. Some Facebook employees resign in protest.
June 2020: Facebook says it will add labels to all posts about voting that direct users to authoritative information from state and local election officials. This includes posts by the president.
July 8, 2020: A quasi-independent civil-rights audit criticizes Facebook’s “vexing and heartbreaking decisions” with respect to civil rights and election misinformation, including Trump’s tweets on voting by mail.
August 2020: After years of a hands-off approach, Facebook restricts the conspiracy movement QAnon, but doesn’t ban it outright.
Sept. 3, 2020: Facebook curbs political ads, although only for seven days before the U.S. election.
Oct. 6, 2020: Facebook bans all groups that support QAnon.
Oct. 7, 2020: Facebook further limits political ads, readies more labels for candidate posts that prematurely declare victory or contest official results, and bans the use of “militarized language” in connection with calls for poll watching.
interesting info, I have not seen such facts before.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
