Facebook: We didn’t mean to censor activists

Activists using social media take another hit – but this time, Facebook says its spam filter is to blame.

Environmental activists were unable to post on Facebook pages support their cause this weekend, and initially thought the site was blocking this content. But the social network has spoken up, saying the blocked material wasn’t the result of manual blocking, but of its anti-spam algorithm.

The filter is designed to keep noise off of Facebook, but apparently interpreted the activists’ comments as such. Facebook spokesperson Andrew Noyes told the Associated Press this was unintentional. “Facebook is not – and has never been – in the business of disabling accounts or removing content simply because people are discussing controversial tropics. On the contrary, we want Facebook to be a place where people can openly express their views and opinions, even if others don’t agree with them.”

Facebook assures users that the error will be corrected, but stopped short of giving details on the algorithm, in case spammers could use the information to thwart the system.

While this particular incidence can be blamed on a technical malfunction, it might be a hint of things to come. Among other social networking sites, Facebook has become a platform for chance and a podium for activists, and that doesn’t necessarily bode well for the company. While it serves as a popular outlet for those trying to communicate their message or stir social change, that means it’s making enemies at the same time.

While the Facebook Revolutions were sweeping through the Middle East and Asia, we heard that Facebook was in continued talks with China about the possibility of launching its network there. Of course, it was to be a heavily censored version. But any agreement was slowed down by the ongoing use of Facebook as a platform for social protest and as a portal for organizing demonstrations. Around this time, a lobbyist for the company said that perhaps Facebook might be giving “too much free speech” to countries that were ill-prepared for it.

Clearly, Facebook is trying to toe the line between embracing free speech and providing a home for it, while also staying on the good side of those who could make the site more used (and thus, more valuable) than it already is. Which is why the sudden censorship activists were subject to is worth a pause. Is it possible that Facebook’s anti-spam algorithm might also be programmed to quiet particularly volatile statements from activists?

It’s nothing more than a theory, and maybe we’re simply on the paranoid side, given the current state of social media and activism. We’ve witnessed more than a few platforms willing to compromise with authorities to turn in or thwart users – some of which is understandable, and some of which is not. But we’re going to stop short of definitively pointing any fingers, and just say that these are the types of questions we need to start asking.

If anything, it’s just important to realize that these things are changing, and that Facebook might not be as friendly a home for activists as it used to be. Or, at the very least, we should consider that it might only be able to serve as a forum for open and unlimited communication in some parts of the world. By its own reasoning, some civilizations might not be prepared for as much free speech as others. But this only illustrates how social media is being questioned everywhere, including in the Western world. Limiting social networking sites seemed like something that would be out of the question – but it’s being considered. So a spam filter that might cut more inciting statements from activists doesn’t necessarily seem that preposterous.

Share and Enjoy

Facebook blames algorithm for censoring activists

In case you haven’t heard, there were some alleged censorship issues with Facebook over the weekend. We can blame it on an algorithm – at least for now.

According to the AP, the social networking site emailed notes of apology for blocking environmental activists and others from posting on Facebook pages with similar interests.
    
The most recent problems with Facebook aren’t limited to regular everyday Joes either. Supposedly even Governors of states, like Jan Brewer (a Republican), were having issues with posting information on Facebook.
    
Interestingly enough, Facebook’s little censorship issue doesn’t seem limited to a particular party; as liberals claim their ideas have been censored as well.
    
In the AP story, Facebook attributed problems with posting links and information to an anti-spam algorithm.

There was no deliberate attempt to stifle political opinions and ideas. The algorithm was just doing what it was designed to do and it messed up.
    
It sounds believable doesn’t it? And until people around the world can gather proof that something else is going on, we’ll just have to take their word for it.
    
Personally, I’m not sold on the whole idea that Facebook doesn’t blatantly censor things. I just don’t have the time to go through every little complaint to find proof that something else is going on.
    
But that’s why we have online forums and chat groups, now isn’t it? Maybe I can get help with this Facebook investigation from the online community…
    
I know that computers and the programs that operate them are flawed. We can make them think like us, but they are not us.
    
Yes, an algorithm can indeed mess up and believe legitimate content is spam when it is not. But those same algorithms can be tweaked to look out for certain political topics and ideas too.
    
There is rioting and civil unrest all over the world right now, and it was all supposedly coordinated through digital social networks. We are supposed to fear social networks now.

The guy who attacked Olso, Norway put his manifesto online for everyone to see before he went off the deep end. We are supposed to fear open access to information now too, even if that information clearly comes from a nutcase.

Can you see what the trend is lately?

Governments all over the world are mismanaging their countries to the point of collapse and some people are choosing to go nuts because of it. Some people are remaining sane, but we being told that the bad people are only bad because they got the idea to be bad from social media.

If it weren’t for social media people would love and accept the way world governments are ruining the financial future of the masses. Right?

Authoritarians are also trying to sell us on the idea that the Internet needs to be filtered and possibly censored by the government because too much access to information will somehow inspire people to carry out terrorists attacks.

Facebook, like it or not, falls into the same category that government does. It is a huge organization that has only been able to grow so large because the elite allowed it to.

The political/financial establishment is also the reason why people currently value Facebook around $100 billion. Do you really think Facebook creates as much tangible value as say Apple or Microsoft?

No way.

The day is going to come when the battle for the Internet can no longer be ignored.

The idea of an Internet and the connectivity it brings goes against the current mainstream ideas of how people should be governed. Many politicians and powerful figures think that the Internet gives people too much power to share ideas and expose their lies.

Maybe the recent issues with Facebook censorship can really be blamed on an algorithm. But keep in mind those algorithms are built by people who are motivated by certain things.

The Facebook staff who create the anti-spam algorithms can be motivated to make their algorithms censor content based on the ideas and information it contains, if they were persuaded to think that doing so would be in their best interests.

When it’s all said and done, the interests of political activists and Facebook probably will not be lined up. For now, though, we can blame the algorithm.

Share and Enjoy