| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − |
| |
| | {{Infobox organization | | {{Infobox organization |
| | | name = Facebook Inc {{verified}} | | | name = Facebook Inc {{verified}} |
| Line 11: |
Line 10: |
| | | website = https://facebook.com | | | website = https://facebook.com |
| | }} | | }} |
| − | | + | '''Facebook''' (stylized '''facebook''' and '''fascistbook''') is a [[systemically racist]] and [[Censorship|censoring]] [[social networking]] website that was deeply involved in [[election fraud]] during the [[United States]] [[2020 Presidential election]].<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/how-mark-zuckerbergs-350-million-threatens-democracy</ref> It was founded on a [[liberal]] agenda and profits by exploiting personal information in users' profiles, by advertising, and by giving a platform for liberals to open fire on [[conservative]] leaders and ideals. Users can spend, or indeed waste, their time on it by uploading pictures (typically of themselves or their pets), gossiping about others, talking to friends, interfering with marriages and personal relationships, and by acting like a [[busybody]]. Facebook use is correlated with underachievement in school and disruption of social relationships, such as marriage or friendships.<ref>[http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/facebook-dumber-study-shows-users-social-networking-site-grades-article-1.363026 ''Does Facebook make you more dumb?'']</ref> For many young people, Facebook use replaces healthier activities and social gatherings. |
| − | '''Facebook''' (stylized '''facebook''' and '''fascistbook''') is a [[systemically racist]] and [[Censorship|censoring]] [[social networking]] website that was deeply involved in [[election fraud]] during the [[United States]] [[2020 Presidential election]].<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/how-mark-zuckerbergs-350-million-threatens-democracy</ref> It was founded on a [[liberal]] agenda and profits by exploiting personal information in users' profiles, by advertising, and by giving a platform for liberals to open fire on [[conservative]] leaders and ideals. Users can spend, or indeed waste, their time on it by uploading pictures (typically of themselves or their pets), by gossiping about others, by talking to friends, by interfering with marriages and personal relationships, and by acting like a [[busybody]]. Facebook use is correlated with underachievement in school and disruption of social relationships, such as marriage or friendships.<ref>[http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/facebook-dumber-study-shows-users-social-networking-site-grades-article-1.363026 ''Does Facebook make you more dumb?'']</ref> For many young people, Facebook use replaces healthier activities and social gatherings. | |
| | | | |
| | Facebook and [[Instagram]] have been banned in [[Russia]] as an [[extremist]] site for allowing [[hate speech]] and [[Neo-Nazi]] [[propaganda]].<ref>https://www.rt.com/russia/552405-russia-ban-facebook-instagram/</ref> | | Facebook and [[Instagram]] have been banned in [[Russia]] as an [[extremist]] site for allowing [[hate speech]] and [[Neo-Nazi]] [[propaganda]].<ref>https://www.rt.com/russia/552405-russia-ban-facebook-instagram/</ref> |
| Line 38: |
Line 36: |
| | Facebook has a large political influence because of its size.<ref>Bokhari, Allum (November 27, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/11/27/bokhari-how-zuckerberg-became-americas-unappointed-editor-in-chief/ Bokhari: How Zuckerberg Became America’s (Unappointed) Editor-in-Chief]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved November 27, 2019.</ref> Facebook once declared it will never use its product to influence how people on the platform vote.<ref>[http://gizmodo.com/facebook-says-it-doesnt-try-to-influence-how-people-vot-1771276946?rev=1460755179651 Facebook Says it Doesn't Try to Influence How People Vote, Gizmodo, April 15, 2016]</ref> | | Facebook has a large political influence because of its size.<ref>Bokhari, Allum (November 27, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/11/27/bokhari-how-zuckerberg-became-americas-unappointed-editor-in-chief/ Bokhari: How Zuckerberg Became America’s (Unappointed) Editor-in-Chief]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved November 27, 2019.</ref> Facebook once declared it will never use its product to influence how people on the platform vote.<ref>[http://gizmodo.com/facebook-says-it-doesnt-try-to-influence-how-people-vot-1771276946?rev=1460755179651 Facebook Says it Doesn't Try to Influence How People Vote, Gizmodo, April 15, 2016]</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | 98% of political donations from Facebook employees went to [[Barack Obama]] in the [[2008 presidential election]].<ref>[http://beforeitsnews.com/story/684/994/Facebook_self_appointed_arbiter_of_free_speech_tells_Tea_Party_no_more_organizing.html Facebook – self appointed arbiter of “free speech” – tells Tea Party no more organizing, Before It's News, June 2, 2011]</ref> Facebook tampered with news feeds during the [[2010 Midterm elections]] in a 61-million-person [[social experiment]] to see how Facebook could impact the real-world voting behavior of millions of people.<ref>[http://fowler.ucsd.edu/massive_turnout.pdf A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization]</ref> In 2012, Facebook developed a tool called 'voter megaphone' raising questions about its use and ability to influence elections. Facebook secretly tampered with 1.9 million user's news feeds. Zuckerberg has involved himself in politics in the [[2016 presidential election]]. He has publicly called out positions held by [[Donald Trump]] as wrong. Facebook employees have asked if they should try to stop a Trump presidency.<ref>[http://gizmodo.com/facebook-employees-asked-mark-zuckerberg-if-they-should-1771012990 Facebook Employees Asked Mark Zuckerberg If They Should Try to Stop a Donald Trump Presidency, Gizmodo, April 15, 2016]</ref> | + | 98% of political donations from Facebook employees went to [[Barack Obama]] in the [[2008 presidential election]].<ref>[http://beforeitsnews.com/story/684/994/Facebook_self_appointed_arbiter_of_free_speech_tells_Tea_Party_no_more_organizing.html Facebook – self-appointed arbiter of “free speech” – tells Tea Party no more organizing, Before It's News, June 2, 2011]</ref> Facebook tampered with news feeds during the [[2010 Midterm elections]] in a 61-million-person [[social experiment]] to see how Facebook could impact the real-world voting behavior of millions of people.<ref>[http://fowler.ucsd.edu/massive_turnout.pdf A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization]</ref> In 2012, Facebook developed a tool called 'voter megaphone' raising questions about its use and ability to influence elections. Facebook secretly tampered with 1.9 million user's news feeds. Zuckerberg has involved himself in politics in the [[2016 presidential election]]. He has publicly called out positions held by [[Donald Trump]] as wrong. Facebook employees have asked if they should try to stop a Trump presidency.<ref>[http://gizmodo.com/facebook-employees-asked-mark-zuckerberg-if-they-should-1771012990 Facebook Employees Asked Mark Zuckerberg If They Should Try to Stop a Donald Trump Presidency, Gizmodo, April 15, 2016]</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | In 2021, [[Joe Biden]] accused Facebook of "killing people" for allowing misiniformation. When questioned, Biden back off his misinformation and claimed thst the people Facebook was not censoring at the White House's request were killing people.<ref>https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2021/07/19/joe-biden-admits-to-spreading-misinformation-so-will-banning-come-next-n413127</ref> | + | In 2021, [[Joe Biden]] accused Facebook of "killing people" for allowing misinformation. When questioned, Biden backed off his misinformation and claimed that the people Facebook was not censoring at the White House's request were killing people.<ref>https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2021/07/19/joe-biden-admits-to-spreading-misinformation-so-will-banning-come-next-n413127</ref> |
| | | | |
| | ===Leftist dominance=== | | ===Leftist dominance=== |
| − | The world's largest online social network considers itself [[LGBTQQIAAAPPK]] friendly and added civil unions and domestic partnerships to the list of relationships that its users can pick from to best describe their romantic status. The [[Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation]] had lobbied for the policy adoption. The option is only available to Facebook users in the U.S., Canada, the U.K., France and Australia.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/18/facebook-adds-support-sex-civil-unions Facebook Adds Support for Same-Sex Civil Unions, Fox News, February 18, 2011]</ref> | + | The world's largest online social network considers itself [[LGBTQQIAAAPPK]] friendly and added civil unions and domestic partnerships to the list of relationships that its users can pick from to describe best their romantic status. The [[Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation]] had lobbied for the policy adoption. The option is only available to Facebook users in the U.S., Canada, the U.K., France and Australia.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/18/facebook-adds-support-sex-civil-unions Facebook Adds Support for Same-Sex Civil Unions, Fox News, February 18, 2011]</ref> |
| | | | |
| | Facebook takes the extremist liberal view that gender is more than just male and female. Users can choose 58 types of custom genders as of last count to identify from.<ref>[https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2014/02/heres-a-list-of-58-gender-options-for-facebook-users/ Here's a List of 58 Gender Options for Facebook Users, ABCNews, February 13, 2014]</ref> | | Facebook takes the extremist liberal view that gender is more than just male and female. Users can choose 58 types of custom genders as of last count to identify from.<ref>[https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2014/02/heres-a-list-of-58-gender-options-for-facebook-users/ Here's a List of 58 Gender Options for Facebook Users, ABCNews, February 13, 2014]</ref> |
| Line 55: |
Line 53: |
| | A 2019 internal review of Facebook’s whitelisting practices, marked attorney-client privileged, found favoritism to those users to be both widespread and “not publicly defensible....We are not actually doing what we say we do publicly,” said the confidential review. It called the company’s actions “a breach of trust” and added: “Unlike the rest of our community, these people can violate our standards without any consequences.” | | A 2019 internal review of Facebook’s whitelisting practices, marked attorney-client privileged, found favoritism to those users to be both widespread and “not publicly defensible....We are not actually doing what we say we do publicly,” said the confidential review. It called the company’s actions “a breach of trust” and added: “Unlike the rest of our community, these people can violate our standards without any consequences.” |
| | | | |
| − | As of 2020 XCheck included at least 5.8 million users, documents show. In its struggle to accurately moderate a torrent of content and avoid negative attention, Facebook created invisible elite tiers within the social network. In describing the system Facebook misled the public and its own Oversight Board. Facebook spokesman Andy Stone said that the system “was designed for an important reason: to create an additional step so we can accurately enforce policies on content that could require more understanding.” | + | As of 2020, XCheck included at least 5.8 million users, documents show. In its struggle to accurately moderate a torrent of content and avoid negative attention, Facebook created invisible elite tiers within the social network. In describing the system Facebook misled the public and its own Oversight Board. Facebook spokesman Andy Stone said that the system “was designed for an important reason: to create an additional step so we can accurately enforce policies on content that could require more understanding.” |
| | | | |
| | While the program included most government officials, it didn’t include all candidates for public office, at times effectively granting incumbents in elections an advantage over challengers. The discrepancy was most prevalent in state and local races, the documents show, and employees worried Facebook could be subject to accusations of favoritism. | | While the program included most government officials, it didn’t include all candidates for public office, at times effectively granting incumbents in elections an advantage over challengers. The discrepancy was most prevalent in state and local races, the documents show, and employees worried Facebook could be subject to accusations of favoritism. |
| Line 62: |
Line 60: |
| | | | |
| | ===Elections war room=== | | ===Elections war room=== |
| − | Facebook created its first election war room before the [[2018 midterms]]. The war room concept — now known as the Special Operations Center — are staffed around the clock, with employees working in shifts and briefing the next shift when its members come online.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/19/technology/facebook-election-war-room.html</ref> | + | Facebook created its first election war room before the [[2018 midterms]]. The war room concept — now known as the Special Operations Center — is staffed around the clock, with employees working in shifts and briefing the next shift when its members come online.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/19/technology/facebook-election-war-room.html</ref> |
| | | | |
| | ===Censorship and harassment by Facebook=== | | ===Censorship and harassment by Facebook=== |
| Line 73: |
Line 71: |
| | In early 2018, following the revelation that the now-defunct data mining firm Cambridge Analytica had inappropriately acquired about 50 million users' personal information around the time of the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Facebook changed its algorithm, aiming to resolve countless privacy issues. However, this also resulted in [[conservative media]] sources being disfavored by the site compared to [[mainstream media]] sources.<ref>Bokhari, Allum (April 9, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/04/09/report-establishment-media-soaring-on-facebook-conservative-media-in-decline-following-algorithm-change/ Report: Establishment Media Soaring on Facebook, Conservative Media in Decline Following Algorithm Change]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved April 9, 2018.</ref> | | In early 2018, following the revelation that the now-defunct data mining firm Cambridge Analytica had inappropriately acquired about 50 million users' personal information around the time of the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Facebook changed its algorithm, aiming to resolve countless privacy issues. However, this also resulted in [[conservative media]] sources being disfavored by the site compared to [[mainstream media]] sources.<ref>Bokhari, Allum (April 9, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/04/09/report-establishment-media-soaring-on-facebook-conservative-media-in-decline-following-algorithm-change/ Report: Establishment Media Soaring on Facebook, Conservative Media in Decline Following Algorithm Change]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved April 9, 2018.</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | Studies have found that Facebook, among other [[social media]] platforms, engage in censorship.<ref>Haverluck, Michael F. (March 16, 2018). [https://onenewsnow.com/media/2018/03/16/facebook-algorithm-kills-conservative-news-feeds-boosts-lefts Facebook algorithm kills conservative news feeds, boosts left's]. ''OneNewsNow''. Retrieved August 28, 2018.<br>See also: | + | Studies have found that Facebook, among other [[social media]] platforms, engages in censorship.<ref>Haverluck, Michael F. (March 16, 2018). [https://onenewsnow.com/media/2018/03/16/facebook-algorithm-kills-conservative-news-feeds-boosts-lefts Facebook algorithm kills conservative news feeds, boosts left's]. ''OneNewsNow''. Retrieved August 28, 2018.<br>See also: |
| | *Duke, Selwyn (August 28, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/29900-google-is-not-a-search-engine-twitter-and-facebook-aren-t-social-media Google Is Not a Search Engine; Twitter and Facebook Aren’t Social Media]. ''The New American''. Retrieved August 28, 2018.</ref> | | *Duke, Selwyn (August 28, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/29900-google-is-not-a-search-engine-twitter-and-facebook-aren-t-social-media Google Is Not a Search Engine; Twitter and Facebook Aren’t Social Media]. ''The New American''. Retrieved August 28, 2018.</ref> |
| | | | |
| Line 88: |
Line 86: |
| | *Ciccotta, Tom (May 3, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/05/03/never-trumpers-and-leftists-praise-facebooks-blacklisting-of-conservatives/ Never Trumpers and Leftists Praise Facebook’s Blacklisting of Conservatives]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved May 3, 2019.</ref> – Facebook continued allowing actual left-wing hate speech to go unpunished, however.<ref>Multiple references: | | *Ciccotta, Tom (May 3, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/05/03/never-trumpers-and-leftists-praise-facebooks-blacklisting-of-conservatives/ Never Trumpers and Leftists Praise Facebook’s Blacklisting of Conservatives]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved May 3, 2019.</ref> – Facebook continued allowing actual left-wing hate speech to go unpunished, however.<ref>Multiple references: |
| | *Nolan, Lucas (May 3, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/05/03/facebook-bans-dangerous-conservative-figures-but-continues-to-allow-leftist-calls-for-violence/ Facebook Bans ‘Dangerous’ Conservative Figures but Continues to Allow Leftist Calls for Violence]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved May 3, 2019. | | *Nolan, Lucas (May 3, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/05/03/facebook-bans-dangerous-conservative-figures-but-continues-to-allow-leftist-calls-for-violence/ Facebook Bans ‘Dangerous’ Conservative Figures but Continues to Allow Leftist Calls for Violence]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved May 3, 2019. |
| − | *Freiburger, Calvin (May 3, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/facebook-allows-left-wing-page-to-fantasize-about-trump-assassination-funeral Facebook allows left-wing page to fantasize about Pres. Trump assassination, funeral]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved May 4, 2019.</ref> Facebook favored [[mainstream media]] sources over the [[conservative media]].<ref>Clabough, Raven (May 8, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/32235-facebook-s-click-gap-system-favors-establishment-media-over-alternative-media Facebook’s “Click-Gap” System Favors Establishment Media Over Alternative Media]. ''The New American''. Retrieved May 8, 2019.</ref> In May 2019, Facebook censored [[Michelle Malkin]] for speaking out against censorship.<ref>Bokhari Allum (May 10, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/05/10/michelle-malkin-censored-on-facebook-for-opposing-censorship/ Michelle Malkin Censored on Facebook for Opposing Censorship]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved May 10, 2019.</ref> The company also created a list of conservatives it considered potential "hate agents."<ref>Freiburger, Calvin (May 22, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/revealed-facebook-keeps-list-of-conservatives-deemed-potential-hate-agents Revealed: Facebook keeps list of conservatives deemed potential ‘hate agents’]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved May 22, 2019.</ref> Among other examples, Facebook censored a quote by [[Saint Augustine]] as "hate speech,"<ref>Mclean, Dorothy Cummings (July 15, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/facebook-bans-saint-augustine-quote-as-hate-speech Facebook bans Saint Augustine quote as ‘hate speech’]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved July 15, 2019.</ref> and it censored a [[John Birch Society]] article on the U.S. immigration crisis as "hate speech" simply because its title read "Immigrant Invasion."<ref>Miguel, Luis (July 16, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/32860-facebook-slaps-jbs-with-hate-speech-violation-over-immigration-post Facebook Slaps John Birch Society With “Hate Speech” Violation Over Immigration Post]. ''The New American''. Retrieved July 16, 2019.</ref> | + | *Freiburger, Calvin (May 3, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/facebook-allows-left-wing-page-to-fantasize-about-trump-assassination-funeral Facebook allows left-wing page to fantasize about Pres. Trump assassination, funeral]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved May 4, 2019.</ref> Facebook favored [[mainstream media]] sources over the [[conservative media]].<ref>Clabough, Raven (May 8, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/32235-facebook-s-click-gap-system-favors-establishment-media-over-alternative-media Facebook’s “Click-Gap” System Favors Establishment Media Over Alternative Media]. ''The New American''. Retrieved May 8, 2019.</ref> In May 2019, Facebook censored [[Michelle Malkin]] for speaking out against censorship.<ref>Bokhari Allum (May 10, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/05/10/michelle-malkin-censored-on-facebook-for-opposing-censorship/ Michelle Malkin Censored on Facebook for Opposing Censorship]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved May 10, 2019.</ref> The company also created a list of conservatives it considered potential "hate agents."<ref>Freiburger, Calvin (May 22, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/revealed-facebook-keeps-list-of-conservatives-deemed-potential-hate-agents Revealed: Facebook keeps a list of conservatives deemed potential ‘hate agents’]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved May 22, 2019.</ref> Among other examples, Facebook censored a quote by [[Saint Augustine]] as "hate speech,"<ref>Mclean, Dorothy Cummings (July 15, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/facebook-bans-saint-augustine-quote-as-hate-speech Facebook bans [[Saint Augustine]] quote as ‘hate speech’]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved July 15, 2019.</ref> and it censored a [[John Birch Society]] article on the U.S. immigration crisis as "hate speech" simply because its title read "Immigrant Invasion."<ref>Miguel, Luis (July 16, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/32860-facebook-slaps-jbs-with-hate-speech-violation-over-immigration-post Facebook Slaps John Birch Society With “Hate Speech” Violation Over Immigration Post]. ''The New American''. Retrieved July 16, 2019.</ref> |
| | | | |
| | In July 2019, Facebook adopted rules explicitly allowing violent threats against people it deemed "dangerous individuals."<ref>Bokhari, Allum (July 9, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/07/09/facebook-sanctions-violent-threats-against-dangerous-individuals/ Facebook Sanctions Violent Threats Against ‘Dangerous Individuals’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved July 14, 2019.</ref> | | In July 2019, Facebook adopted rules explicitly allowing violent threats against people it deemed "dangerous individuals."<ref>Bokhari, Allum (July 9, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/07/09/facebook-sanctions-violent-threats-against-dangerous-individuals/ Facebook Sanctions Violent Threats Against ‘Dangerous Individuals’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved July 14, 2019.</ref> |
| Line 104: |
Line 102: |
| | |colspan="3"|<hr/>Left:Shi Zhengli; Right:Ralph Baric. | | |colspan="3"|<hr/>Left:Shi Zhengli; Right:Ralph Baric. |
| | |} | | |} |
| − | In the case of the [[Coronavirus]], Facebook used the [[Communist Chinese]]-controlled [[World Health Organization]] (WHO) as an “authority” on health related matters instead of official health guidelines from the [[President of the United States]].<ref>https://about.fb.com/news/2020/04/covid-19-misinfo-update/</ref> This was a matter of [[national security]] and public health. | + | In the case of the [[Coronavirus]], Facebook used the [[Communist Chinese]]-controlled [[World Health Organization]] (WHO) as an “authority” on health-related matters instead of official health guidelines from the [[President of the United States]].<ref>https://about.fb.com/news/2020/04/covid-19-misinfo-update/</ref> This was a matter of [[national security]] and public health. |
| | | | |
| | ====Anthony Fauci and Ralph Baric==== | | ====Anthony Fauci and Ralph Baric==== |
| Line 110: |
Line 108: |
| | The [[Center for Tech and Civic Life]] (CTCL) is a group organized by [[Obama]] operatives and funded by Zuckerberg to promote [[Democrat election fraud]].<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/how-mark-zuckerbergs-350-million-threatens-democracy</ref><ref>https://thefederalist.com/2020/12/07/what-is-mark-zuckerbergs-election-money-doing-in-georgia/</ref> Zuckerberg funneled more than $400 million in election fraud efforts, $350 million was siphoned through the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), | | The [[Center for Tech and Civic Life]] (CTCL) is a group organized by [[Obama]] operatives and funded by Zuckerberg to promote [[Democrat election fraud]].<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/how-mark-zuckerbergs-350-million-threatens-democracy</ref><ref>https://thefederalist.com/2020/12/07/what-is-mark-zuckerbergs-election-money-doing-in-georgia/</ref> Zuckerberg funneled more than $400 million in election fraud efforts, $350 million was siphoned through the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), |
| | | | |
| − | CTCL distributed hundreds of millions in “[[Zuckerbucks]]” to thousands of election jurisdictions in 48 states and [[Washington, D.C.]]. These funds were pitched as “COVID-19 response grants” supposedly intended to assist election officials in the safe conduct of elections. However, the infusion of CTCL funds into Democrat-leaning jurisdictions influenced the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. Much of the Zuckerbucks were not spent on COVID-19 related expenses—with states reporting expenditures on advertising, vehicle purchases, registering teenagers to vote, and other non- COVID-related items. | + | CTCL distributed hundreds of millions in “[[Zuckerbucks]]” to thousands of election jurisdictions in 48 states and [[Washington, D.C.]]. These funds were pitched as “COVID-19 response grants” supposedly intended to assist election officials in the safe conduct of elections. However, the infusion of CTCL funds into Democrat-leaning jurisdictions influenced the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. Much of the Zuckerbucks was not spent on COVID-19-related expenses—with states reporting expenditures on advertising, vehicle purchases, registering teenagers to vote, and other non-COVID-related items. |
| | | | |
| | Zuckerberg money to [[CTCL]] was laundered through the [[Chan Zuckerberg Initiative]] (CZI) controlled by Zuckerberg and his wife. Chan Zuckerberg also gave $433,000 to Ralph Baric,<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/exclusive/facebook-czi-funds-controversial-wuhan-researcher/</ref> who was described by [[Shi Zhengli]] of the [[Wuhan Institute of Virology]] (WIV) as her “longtime collaborator” on [[gain-of-function]] research on the bat [[coronavirus]].<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/wuhan-lab-partner-scheming-on-pandemic-profits/</ref> Baric also received funding from [[Anthony Fauci]]'s National Institute of Health (NIH). Fauci admitted that Facebook CEO [[Mark Zuckerberg]] offered Fauci “resources and money” at the time same Zuckerberg was plowing cash into interfering in the 2020 presidential election on behalf of Democrats.<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/news/fauci-reveals-what-was-redacted-in-his-zuckerberg-emails/</ref> | | Zuckerberg money to [[CTCL]] was laundered through the [[Chan Zuckerberg Initiative]] (CZI) controlled by Zuckerberg and his wife. Chan Zuckerberg also gave $433,000 to Ralph Baric,<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/exclusive/facebook-czi-funds-controversial-wuhan-researcher/</ref> who was described by [[Shi Zhengli]] of the [[Wuhan Institute of Virology]] (WIV) as her “longtime collaborator” on [[gain-of-function]] research on the bat [[coronavirus]].<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/wuhan-lab-partner-scheming-on-pandemic-profits/</ref> Baric also received funding from [[Anthony Fauci]]'s National Institute of Health (NIH). Fauci admitted that Facebook CEO [[Mark Zuckerberg]] offered Fauci “resources and money” at the time same Zuckerberg was plowing cash into interfering in the 2020 presidential election on behalf of Democrats.<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/news/fauci-reveals-what-was-redacted-in-his-zuckerberg-emails/</ref> |
| Line 126: |
Line 124: |
| | :{{See also|Biden Putsch|}} | | :{{See also|Biden Putsch|}} |
| | | | |
| − | In August 2020 it was reported that Facebook was planning for the possibility that [[President]] Trump or his campaign could try to challenge mail in ballot election results. ''[[The New York Times]]'' reported that staffers were already putting together contingency plans in the event Trump tries to use Facebook to dispute the vote by declaring the [[U.S. Postal Service]] lost mail-in ballots or that other groups interfered with the vote. Facebook officials, including [[CEO]] Mark Zuckerberg, were holding daily meetings to discuss how to minimize the platform from being used to cast doubts on the results. | + | In August 2020 it was reported that Facebook was planning for the possibility that [[President]] Trump or his campaign could try to challenge mail-in ballot election results. ''[[The New York Times]]'' reported that staffers were already putting together contingency plans in the event Trump tries to use Facebook to dispute the vote by declaring the [[U.S. Postal Service]] lost mail-in ballots or that other groups interfered with the vote. Facebook officials, including [[CEO]] Mark Zuckerberg, were holding daily meetings to discuss how to minimize the platform from being used to cast doubts on the results. |
| | | | |
| | The Times noted that one plan would include a “kill switch” to shut down political ads after Election Day. The company officials believe the ads, which Facebook does not check for truthfulness, could be used to disseminate misinformation. | | The Times noted that one plan would include a “kill switch” to shut down political ads after Election Day. The company officials believe the ads, which Facebook does not check for truthfulness, could be used to disseminate misinformation. |
| Line 137: |
Line 135: |
| | The [[Center for Tech and Civic Life]] (CTCL) is a group organized by [[Obama]] operatives and funded by Zuckerberg to promote [[Democrat election fraud]].<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/how-mark-zuckerbergs-350-million-threatens-democracy</ref><ref>https://thefederalist.com/2020/12/07/what-is-mark-zuckerbergs-election-money-doing-in-georgia/</ref> Zuckerberg funneled more than $400 million in election fraud efforts, $350 million was siphoned through the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), | | The [[Center for Tech and Civic Life]] (CTCL) is a group organized by [[Obama]] operatives and funded by Zuckerberg to promote [[Democrat election fraud]].<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/how-mark-zuckerbergs-350-million-threatens-democracy</ref><ref>https://thefederalist.com/2020/12/07/what-is-mark-zuckerbergs-election-money-doing-in-georgia/</ref> Zuckerberg funneled more than $400 million in election fraud efforts, $350 million was siphoned through the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), |
| | | | |
| − | CTCL distributed hundreds of millions in “[[Zuckerbucks]]” to thousands of election jurisdictions in 48 states and [[Washington, D.C.]]. These funds were pitched as “COVID-19 response grants” supposedly intended to assist election officials in the safe conduct of elections. However, the infusion of CTCL funds into Democrat-leaning jurisdictions influenced the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. Much of the Zuckerbucks were not spent on COVID-19 related expenses—with states reporting expenditures on advertising, vehicle purchases, registering teenagers to vote, and other non- COVID-related items. | + | CTCL distributed hundreds of millions in “[[Zuckerbucks]]” to thousands of election jurisdictions in 48 states and [[Washington, D.C.]]. These funds were pitched as “COVID-19 response grants” supposedly intended to assist election officials in the safe conduct of elections. However, the infusion of CTCL funds into Democrat-leaning jurisdictions influenced the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. Much of the Zuckerbucks were not spent on COVID-19-related expenses—with states reporting expenditures on advertising, vehicle purchases, registering teenagers to vote, and other non-COVID-related items. |
| | | | |
| | The pivotal state of [[Georgia]] was one of the biggest targets of these funds, ultimately receiving one of the largest allocations of CTCL funds in the nation.<ref>https://creativedestructionmedia.com/news/politics/2021/06/05/report-zuckerberg-went-down-to-ga-with-45-million-more-than-any-state/</ref> | | The pivotal state of [[Georgia]] was one of the biggest targets of these funds, ultimately receiving one of the largest allocations of CTCL funds in the nation.<ref>https://creativedestructionmedia.com/news/politics/2021/06/05/report-zuckerberg-went-down-to-ga-with-45-million-more-than-any-state/</ref> |
| Line 149: |
Line 147: |
| | Facebook banned new political ads in the week before Election Day, curtailing a highly effective conduit for raising last-minute money and pinpointing messages to voters. | | Facebook banned new political ads in the week before Election Day, curtailing a highly effective conduit for raising last-minute money and pinpointing messages to voters. |
| | | | |
| − | The mammoth social network with 2.7 billion users worldwide has become an essential tool for political advertisers — raking in more than $100 million from the presidential campaigns of Donald Trump and Joe Biden alone. Unlike TV or print media, Facebook allows campaigns to rapidly respond to events, sometimes in a day or less. | + | The mammoth social network with 2.7 billion users worldwide has become an essential tool for political advertisers — raking in more than $100 million from the presidential campaigns of Donald Trump and Joe Biden alone. Unlike TV or print media, Facebook allows campaigns to respond rapidly to events, sometimes in a day or less. |
| | {{quotebox|"The last week of the election is the most important week when it comes to messaging," said Tara McGowan, co-founder of digital-first Democratic outfit [[ACRONYM]], adding that "most voters in this country do not tune in and start paying attention or making their plans to vote until the final days of an election."<ref>https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/03/facebook-ad-shakeup-trump-biden-408641</ref>}} | | {{quotebox|"The last week of the election is the most important week when it comes to messaging," said Tara McGowan, co-founder of digital-first Democratic outfit [[ACRONYM]], adding that "most voters in this country do not tune in and start paying attention or making their plans to vote until the final days of an election."<ref>https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/03/facebook-ad-shakeup-trump-biden-408641</ref>}} |
| | By October 29, Facebook had already rejected 2.2 million ads and blocked 120,000 posts citing "election misinformation."<ref>https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/facebook-blocks-posts-election-misinformation</ref> While mainstream [[fake news]] media are allowed to churn baseless scandals and smears in an [[October Surprise]], President Trump will be restricted from responding. | | By October 29, Facebook had already rejected 2.2 million ads and blocked 120,000 posts citing "election misinformation."<ref>https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/facebook-blocks-posts-election-misinformation</ref> While mainstream [[fake news]] media are allowed to churn baseless scandals and smears in an [[October Surprise]], President Trump will be restricted from responding. |
| Line 156: |
Line 154: |
| | [[File:Andy Stone conflict of interest.png|right|350px|thumb|Andy Stone conflict of interest.]] | | [[File:Andy Stone conflict of interest.png|right|350px|thumb|Andy Stone conflict of interest.]] |
| | :{{See also|Biden-Ukraine scandal}} | | :{{See also|Biden-Ukraine scandal}} |
| − | On October 14, 2020, Twitter and Facebook locked the account of the ''[[New York Post]]'' and limited their ability to share and post news stories after the ''New York Post'' published a bombshell report detailing some of [[Hunter Biden]]’s emails proving that Hunter Biden introduced his father Joe Biden to a top Ukranian energy firm executive from [[Burisma]] while Joe Biden was [[vice president]]. | + | On October 14, 2020, Twitter and Facebook locked the account of the ''[[New York Post]]'' and limited their ability to share and post news stories after the ''New York Post'' published a bombshell report detailing some of [[Hunter Biden]]’s emails proving that Hunter Biden introduced his father Joe Biden to a top Ukrainian energy firm executive from [[Burisma]] while Joe Biden was [[vice president]]. |
| | :*This was evidence Joe Biden used his influence as vice president to enrich his family through lucrative business deals with foreign nations like Ukraine and China, compromising the integrity of the vice presidency, as well as US [[national security]]. | | :*This was evidence Joe Biden used his influence as vice president to enrich his family through lucrative business deals with foreign nations like Ukraine and China, compromising the integrity of the vice presidency, as well as US [[national security]]. |
| | | | |
| − | Facebook’s Policy Communication’s Director Andy Stone said, | + | Facebook’s Policy Communication Director Andy Stone said, |
| | {{quotebox-float|“While I will intentionally not link to the New York Post, I want to be clear that this story is eligible to be fact-checked by Facebook’s third-party [[fact-checking]] partners. This is part our standard process to reduce the spread of misinformation. We temporarily reduce distribution pending fact-checker review.”<ref>https://twitter.com/andymstone/status/1316395902479872000</ref>}} | | {{quotebox-float|“While I will intentionally not link to the New York Post, I want to be clear that this story is eligible to be fact-checked by Facebook’s third-party [[fact-checking]] partners. This is part our standard process to reduce the spread of misinformation. We temporarily reduce distribution pending fact-checker review.”<ref>https://twitter.com/andymstone/status/1316395902479872000</ref>}} |
| | Before working for Facebook, Andy Stone worked for the Democrat’s House Majority PAC as well at the [[Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee]] (DCCC), which is a clear [[conflict of interest]] during an election year. Facebook and their executives made the pre-emptive decision to label the New York Post‘s Hunter Biden story as factually incorrect and limited the publishing ability of the ''New York Post''’s account before they even “[[fact check|fact checked]]” the already factually correct article. | | Before working for Facebook, Andy Stone worked for the Democrat’s House Majority PAC as well at the [[Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee]] (DCCC), which is a clear [[conflict of interest]] during an election year. Facebook and their executives made the pre-emptive decision to label the New York Post‘s Hunter Biden story as factually incorrect and limited the publishing ability of the ''New York Post''’s account before they even “[[fact check|fact checked]]” the already factually correct article. |
| | | | |
| − | Facebook employed a [[lobbyist]], David Wade, who worked for Hunter Biden, advising him on how to deal with the media’s scrutiny over his ties to Burisma, while also “fact checking” and banning investigative reports about Hunter Biden and Burisma.<ref>https://loomered.com/2020/12/17/exclusive-hunter-biden-emails-reveal-founder-of-facebooks-dc-office-banned-accounts-at-bidens-request-as-family-made-millions-from-silicon-valley-dems/</ref> | + | Facebook employed a [[lobbyist]], David Wade, who worked for Hunter Biden, advising him on how to deal with the media’s scrutiny over his ties to Burisma, while also “fact-checking” and banning investigative reports about Hunter Biden and Burisma.<ref>https://loomered.com/2020/12/17/exclusive-hunter-biden-emails-reveal-founder-of-facebooks-dc-office-banned-accounts-at-bidens-request-as-family-made-millions-from-silicon-valley-dems/</ref> |
| | | | |
| | ====Oversight Board==== | | ====Oversight Board==== |
| − | The Facebook Oversight Board upheld the platform’s decision to ban President Donald Trump – a strong source of opposition to the Chinese Communist Party.<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/politics/facebook-oversight-board-anti-trump-foreign/</ref> One of the board’s four co-chairs, former Prime Minister of Denmark Helle Thorning-Schmidt, has ties to the Chinese Communist Party’s [[United Front Work Department]] (UFWD). The U.S. government’s Economic and Security Review Commission flagged the UFWD for seeking “co-opt and neutralize sources of potential opposition to the policies and authority of its ruling Chinese Communist Party” and coerce American leaders “to take actions or adopt positions supportive of [[Beijing]]’s preferred policies.”<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/fb-oversight-board-chair-headlined-ccp-conference/</ref> | + | The Facebook Oversight Board upheld the platform’s decision to ban President Donald Trump – a strong source of opposition to the Chinese Communist Party.<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/politics/facebook-oversight-board-anti-trump-foreign/</ref> One of the board’s four co-chairs, former Prime Minister of Denmark Helle Thorning-Schmidt, has ties to the Chinese Communist Party’s [[United Front Work Department]] (UFWD). The U.S. government’s Economic and Security Review Commission flagged the UFWD for seeking to “co-opt and neutralize sources of potential opposition to the policies and authority of its ruling Chinese Communist Party” and coerce American leaders “to take actions or adopt positions supportive of [[Beijing]]’s preferred policies.”<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/fb-oversight-board-chair-headlined-ccp-conference/</ref> |
| | | | |
| | ===FEC disclosure exemptions=== | | ===FEC disclosure exemptions=== |
| − | Political advertising regarding federal elections and candidates that is purchased for appearance on radio, television and print generally must adhere to [[Federal Election Commission]] rules requiring clear disclosure of the committee or donor paying for the advertisements. During 2011, [[Google]] and Facebook hired [[Marxist]] operative [[Marc Elias]] to help them obtain an exemption from this requirement for political advertising on their platforms. Elias argued the restrictions were not practical for his clients, with FEC commissioners ultimately voting 4-2 in favor of the exemption for Google and deadlocking 3-3 on the request regarding Facebook.<ref>Vogel, Kenneth P.; and Kang, Cecilia. [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/19/us/politics/facebook-google-russia-meddling-disclosure.html “Senators Demand Online Ad Disclosures as Tech Lobby Mobilizes.”] New York Times. October 19, 2017.</ref> | + | Political advertising regarding federal elections and candidates that are purchased for appearance on radio, television and print generally must adhere to [[Federal Election Commission]] rules requiring clear disclosure of the committee or donor paying for the advertisements. In 2011, [[Google]] and Facebook hired [[Marxist]] operative [[Marc Elias]] to help them obtain an exemption from this requirement for political advertising on their platforms. Elias argued the restrictions were not practical for his clients, with FEC commissioners ultimately voting 4-2 in favor of the exemption for Google and deadlocking 3-3 on the request regarding Facebook.<ref>Vogel, Kenneth P.; and Kang, Cecilia. [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/19/us/politics/facebook-google-russia-meddling-disclosure.html “Senators Demand Online Ad Disclosures as Tech Lobby Mobilizes.”] New York Times. October 19, 2017.</ref> |
| | | | |
| | Facebook continued to operate as if exempt from disclosure rules. During the 2016 U.S. general election, $100,000 worth of Russian-backed and undisclosed advertisements intended to influence voters were purchased on Facebook with another $4,700 spent by Russian sources on Google political advertisements. In October 2017, following the controversy that ensued regarding Russian interference in the 2016 elections, both Republican and Democratic Senators advocated for legislation to require Facebook and Google to adhere to the same disclosure rules as other media. | | Facebook continued to operate as if exempt from disclosure rules. During the 2016 U.S. general election, $100,000 worth of Russian-backed and undisclosed advertisements intended to influence voters were purchased on Facebook with another $4,700 spent by Russian sources on Google political advertisements. In October 2017, following the controversy that ensued regarding Russian interference in the 2016 elections, both Republican and Democratic Senators advocated for legislation to require Facebook and Google to adhere to the same disclosure rules as other media. |
| Line 179: |
Line 177: |
| | ====Early roots of relationship==== | | ====Early roots of relationship==== |
| | :{{See also|Vice Presidency of Joe Biden (2009–2017)|}} | | :{{See also|Vice Presidency of Joe Biden (2009–2017)|}} |
| − | On October 10, 2010, [[Hunter Biden]] emailed Arlene Busch, a partner at Rosemont Seneca, the firm set up to sell access and influence to Vice President Joe Biden. The subject of the email was his relationship with [[Chris Kelly]], Mark Zuckerberg's right-hand-man. | + | On October 10, 2010, [[Hunter Biden]] emailed Arlene Busch, a partner at Rosemont Seneca, the firm set up to sell access and influence to Vice President Joe Biden. The subject of the email was his relationship with [[Chris Kelly]], Mark Zuckerberg's right-hand man. |
| | [[File:Chris is worth about $350 MILLION. He remains Mark Zuckerberg’s closest adviser.png|right|300px|thumb|"Chris is worth about $350 MILLION. He remains Mark Zuckerberg’s closest adviser....He is more tied to Silicon Valley money than anyone I know and is looking for places to put his money."]] | | [[File:Chris is worth about $350 MILLION. He remains Mark Zuckerberg’s closest adviser.png|right|300px|thumb|"Chris is worth about $350 MILLION. He remains Mark Zuckerberg’s closest adviser....He is more tied to Silicon Valley money than anyone I know and is looking for places to put his money."]] |
| | {{quotebox-float|"I brought Chris Kelly to lunch. We can talk in more detail tomorrow about the meeting, but just to be clear– Chris is worth about $350 MILLION. He remains [[Mark Zuckerberg]]’s closest adviser and was the first person outside of programers Facebook hired. | | {{quotebox-float|"I brought Chris Kelly to lunch. We can talk in more detail tomorrow about the meeting, but just to be clear– Chris is worth about $350 MILLION. He remains [[Mark Zuckerberg]]’s closest adviser and was the first person outside of programers Facebook hired. |
| Line 203: |
Line 201: |
| | Facebook DC<ref>https://loomered.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/image-7-1024x757.png</ref>}} | | Facebook DC<ref>https://loomered.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/image-7-1024x757.png</ref>}} |
| | In 2012 [[Eric Schwerin]], who formally headed up the partnership with Chinese Communists, devised a scheme to milk money out of Facebook and other Silicon Valley Democrats for then Delaware Attorney General [[Beau Biden]]: | | In 2012 [[Eric Schwerin]], who formally headed up the partnership with Chinese Communists, devised a scheme to milk money out of Facebook and other Silicon Valley Democrats for then Delaware Attorney General [[Beau Biden]]: |
| − | {{quotebox-float|“Does it make sense to reach out to Chris Kelly (maybe in an email from Hunter) and ask him to suggest a number of Silicon Valley Dem Types that we should invite to Beau’s party? I am sure he would encourage them to come and giving him some ownership of that group might not be a bad idea. | + | {{quotebox-float|“Does it make sense to reach out to Chris Kelly (maybe in an email from Hunter) and ask him to suggest a number of Silicon Valley Dem Types that we should invite to Beau’s party? I am sure he would encourage them to come and giving him some ownership of that group might not be a bad idea. |
| | | | |
| − | “Any complications vis a vis [[Kamala Harris]] and Chris? I assume they are all good?”<ref>Kamala Harris and Chris Kelly had opposed each other in 2010 California Attorney General Democratic primary. https://ballotpedia.org/California_Attorney_General_election,_2010#Democratic_primary</ref> | + | “Any complications vis a vis [[Kamala Harris]] and Chris? I assume they are all good?”<ref>Kamala Harris and Chris Kelly had opposed each other in the 2010 California Attorney General Democratic primary. https://ballotpedia.org/California_Attorney_General_election,_2010#Democratic_primary</ref> |
| | | | |
| | Hunter Biden replied to this email saying, “Very good idea”. | | Hunter Biden replied to this email saying, “Very good idea”. |
| Line 227: |
Line 225: |
| | In January 2021, ''[[TIME magazine]]'' did an exposé on the [[Ukrainian]] [[Azov Battalion]] entitled, ''How a [[White supremacy|White-Supremacist]] Militia Uses Facebook to Radicalize and Train New Members.''<ref>https://time.com/5926750/azov-far-right-movement-facebook/</ref> | | In January 2021, ''[[TIME magazine]]'' did an exposé on the [[Ukrainian]] [[Azov Battalion]] entitled, ''How a [[White supremacy|White-Supremacist]] Militia Uses Facebook to Radicalize and Train New Members.''<ref>https://time.com/5926750/azov-far-right-movement-facebook/</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | On March 10, 2022 Facebook and Instagram reversed longstanding policies and approved open support for [[Nazism]] on their platforms and modified [[violent]] [[hate speech]] restrictions to allow advocating death to Russians.<ref>https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2022/03/10/facebook-and-instagram-say-it-is-okay-to-support-nazism-in-ukraine-and-they-modify-terms-allowing-advocacy-for-death-to-russians/</ref> | + | On March 10, 2022, Facebook and Instagram reversed longstanding policies and approved open support for [[Nazism]] on their platforms and modified [[violent]] [[hate speech]] restrictions to allow advocating death to Russians.<ref>https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2022/03/10/facebook-and-instagram-say-it-is-okay-to-support-nazism-in-ukraine-and-they-modify-terms-allowing-advocacy-for-death-to-russians/</ref> |
| | | | |
| | ===Systemic racism=== | | ===Systemic racism=== |
| | [[File:This-is-Africa-offensive-images.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Museum exhibit by Facebook CCP clients in [[Wuhan, China]].]] | | [[File:This-is-Africa-offensive-images.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Museum exhibit by Facebook CCP clients in [[Wuhan, China]].]] |
| − | Facebook labels Black men as "[[Primates]]". In its auto generated topic recommendation feature beneath videos about Black men, Facebook will ask, "Keep seeing videos about Primates?" When social media users complain, Facebook is quick to blame the hidden [[institutional racism]] within the multinational corporate monopoly on [[AI]]. However, no disciplinary action is ever taken against Facebook developers or management who purchase outside racist AI facial recognition technology.<ref> https://mashable.com/article/facebook-ai-primates-label</ref> Civil rights advocates have criticized the racist facial recognition industry for its problems with accuracy, particularly when it comes to people who are not white. Due to this inaccuracy, many people of colour have been arrested wrongly as it is being used for investigations by the [[police]].<ref>https://news.abplive.com/news/world/facebook-takes-down-topic-recommendation-feature-after-black-men-labelled-as-primates-1480235</ref> In an article for ''Mashable'', technology writer Jennimai Nguyen reported "While AI can always make mistakes, it is the company's responsibility to properly train its [[algorithm]]s, and this misstep cannot be blamed on a lack of resources. In addition to mishandling past racial justice issues within the company, Facebook's lack of transparent plan to address its AI problem continues to sow distrust."<ref>https://mashable.com/article/facebook-ai-primates-label</ref> The latest racist attack sparked international condemnation and outrage.<ref>https://blackhotfirenetwork.com/2021/09/04/facebook-ai-slaps-primates-label-on-daily-mail-video-of-black-men/</ref> | + | Facebook labels Black men as "[[Primates]]". In its auto-generated topic recommendation feature beneath videos about Black men, Facebook will ask, "Keep seeing videos about Primates?" When social media users complain, Facebook is quick to blame the hidden [[institutional racism]] within the multinational corporate monopoly on [[AI]]. However, no disciplinary action is ever taken against Facebook developers or management who purchase outside racist AI facial recognition technology.<ref> https://mashable.com/article/facebook-ai-primates-label</ref> Civil rights advocates have criticized the racist facial recognition industry for its problems with accuracy, particularly when it comes to people who are not white. Due to this inaccuracy, many people of colour have been arrested wrongly as it is being used for investigations by the [[police]].<ref>https://news.abplive.com/news/world/facebook-takes-down-topic-recommendation-feature-after-black-men-labelled-as-primates-1480235</ref> In an article for ''Mashable'', technology writer Jennimai Nguyen reported "While AI can always make mistakes, it is the company's responsibility to properly train its [[algorithm]]s, and this misstep cannot be blamed on a lack of resources. In addition to mishandling past racial justice issues within the company, Facebook's lack of a transparent plan to address its AI problem continues to sow distrust."<ref>https://mashable.com/article/facebook-ai-primates-label</ref> The latest racist attack sparked international condemnation and outrage.<ref>https://blackhotfirenetwork.com/2021/09/04/facebook-ai-slaps-primates-label-on-daily-mail-video-of-black-men/</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | Facebook is taking money from the [[CCP]] to promote “propaganda” playing down the plight of Uyghur Muslims. The CCP's treatment of [[Uyghur]] people in the western province of [[Xinjiang]] has been widely condemned in the West, with the US government and others accusing the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) of genocide. Facebook has not only allowed state-run outlets like ''China Daily'' and CGTN to publish posts that dismiss these concerns as Western “disinformation” – it has accepted advertising payments to help promote this content to millions of people. | + | Facebook is taking money from the [[CCP]] to promote “propaganda” playing down the plight of Uyghur Muslims. The CCP's treatment of [[Uyghur]] people in the western province of [[Xinjiang]] has been widely condemned in the West, with the US government and others accusing the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) of genocide. Facebook has not only allowed state-run outlets like ''China Daily'' and CGTN to publish posts that dismiss these concerns as Western “disinformation” – it has also accepted advertising payments to help promote this content to millions of people. |
| | | | |
| | Presented with the findings of ''Press Gazette''’s investigation, Imran Ahmed – chief executive of the Center for Countering Digital Hate – said it was “beyond disgusting that Facebook is taking money to promote Chinese state propaganda denying the reality that their state is engaged in crimes against humanity against Uyghur Muslims”.<ref>https://pressgazette.co.uk/facebook-china-misinformation/</ref> | | Presented with the findings of ''Press Gazette''’s investigation, Imran Ahmed – chief executive of the Center for Countering Digital Hate – said it was “beyond disgusting that Facebook is taking money to promote Chinese state propaganda denying the reality that their state is engaged in crimes against humanity against Uyghur Muslims”.<ref>https://pressgazette.co.uk/facebook-china-misinformation/</ref> |
| Line 250: |
Line 248: |
| | | | |
| | ==Child sex allegations== | | ==Child sex allegations== |
| − | Predator Catchers Indianapolis posted a video on the internet showing Meta/Facebook Manager of Community Development Jeren Andrew Miles, of Palm Springs, Calif., being caught in a child sex sting in Columbus, Ohio.<ref>https://youtu.be/eI7F8uOKpNo</ref> Miles has lost his role within the company, though it is unclear whether he resigned or was fired, according to ''TechCrunch''. While ''TechCrunch'' confirmed Miles’s departure with company spokesperson Andrew “Drew” Pusateri, the public relations hack appeared to attempt to cover up the story altogether. “The seriousness of these allegations cannot be overstated. The individual is no longer employed with the company. We are actively investigating this situation and cannot provide further comment at this time,” reads Pusateri’s statement. He went on to tell reporter Ingrid Lunden that the story was not “newsworthy,” which she included in her copy : “I’ll point out that Pusateri also tried to talk me out of the newsworthiness of this story over the phone before sending over the statement, noting that other outlets were not covering it (thanks for the advice)…”<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/2022/02/18/facebook-spox-tried-quashing-pedophile-story/</ref> | + | Predator Catchers Indianapolis posted a video on the internet showing Meta/Facebook Manager of Community Development Jeren Andrew Miles, of Palm Springs, Calif., being caught in a child sex sting in Columbus, Ohio.<ref>https://youtu.be/eI7F8uOKpNo</ref> Miles has lost his role within the company, though it is unclear whether he resigned or was fired, according to ''TechCrunch''. While ''TechCrunch'' confirmed Miles’s departure with company spokesperson Andrew “Drew” Pusateri, the public relations hack appeared to attempt to cover up the story altogether. “The seriousness of these allegations cannot be overstated. The individual is no longer employed with the company. We are actively investigating this situation and cannot provide further comment at this time,” reads Pusateri’s statement. He went on to tell reporter Ingrid Lunden that the story was not “newsworthy,” which she included in her copy: “I’ll point out that Pusateri also tried to talk me out of the newsworthiness of this story over the phone before sending over the statement, noting that other outlets were not covering it (thanks for the advice)…”<ref>https://thenationalpulse.com/2022/02/18/facebook-spox-tried-quashing-pedophile-story/</ref> |
| | | | |
| | Prior to joining Facebook/Meta as its Policy Communications Manager, Drew Pusateri spent over a decade in Democratic politics, including working as [[Hillary Clinton]]’s Missouri Communications Director during the 2016 election.<ref>https://www.linkedin.com/in/drew-pusateri-2828322b/</ref> Pusateri has previously worked in top communications roles for several Democratic members of Congress including Senator Claire McCaskill, Senator Gary Peters, and Representative Bruce Braley. | | Prior to joining Facebook/Meta as its Policy Communications Manager, Drew Pusateri spent over a decade in Democratic politics, including working as [[Hillary Clinton]]’s Missouri Communications Director during the 2016 election.<ref>https://www.linkedin.com/in/drew-pusateri-2828322b/</ref> Pusateri has previously worked in top communications roles for several Democratic members of Congress including Senator Claire McCaskill, Senator Gary Peters, and Representative Bruce Braley. |
| Line 257: |
Line 255: |
| | "Human smugglers are openly advertising their services on Facebook, falsely telling Central Americans interested in crossing illegally into the United States that they can promise a “100 percent” safe journey,” [[NBC News]] reported.<ref>https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/human-smugglers-use-facebook-connect-migrants-spread-false-hope-reaching-n1262984</ref> The posts come from public Facebook pages named “Migrants from Various Countries in Mexico” and “Migrants in the Mexico-U.S.A. Border Awaiting Hearing” and include multiple posts a day: some from smugglers and some from Central Americans seeking to immigrate illegally to the U.S. | | "Human smugglers are openly advertising their services on Facebook, falsely telling Central Americans interested in crossing illegally into the United States that they can promise a “100 percent” safe journey,” [[NBC News]] reported.<ref>https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/human-smugglers-use-facebook-connect-migrants-spread-false-hope-reaching-n1262984</ref> The posts come from public Facebook pages named “Migrants from Various Countries in Mexico” and “Migrants in the Mexico-U.S.A. Border Awaiting Hearing” and include multiple posts a day: some from smugglers and some from Central Americans seeking to immigrate illegally to the U.S. |
| | | | |
| − | On March 24, 2021 a user asked: “Excuse me does anyone know if they are letting [people] with kids cross the bridge?” In unanimous response, users insisted “only if they enter alone” and “they are not letting minors with parents pass.” “Travel to Mexico to the United States. Costs $8,000. 100 percent safe,” another post read in Spanish “Cross through Matamoros. You walk one hour, after in automobile until you arrive to your relative.” What’s more, a post from an apparent smuggler included a picture of a family sitting on a plane with the text: “Make your dream a reality in the United States. We are here to help you,” the caption reads. “The journey is safe and reliable and the price is $4,500 leaving from Monterrey to San Antonio, Texas.” “Someone help me go to the United States,” another person posted to one of the Facebook groups. The post was met with several comments from people providing their smuggling rates, destinations and contact information. “It’s ready. 3,000 to arrive at the line/ 6000 to jump to your destination. Whatever state. Pay when your relatives receive you,” an apparent smuggler wrote. | + | On March 24, 2021, a user asked: “Excuse me does anyone know if they are letting [people] with kids cross the bridge?” In unanimous response, users insisted “only if they enter alone” and “they are not letting minors with parents pass.” “Travel to Mexico to the United States. Costs $8,000. 100 percent safe,” another post read in Spanish “Cross through Matamoros. You walk one hour, after in automobile until you arrive to your relative.” What’s more, a post from an apparent smuggler included a picture of a family sitting on a plane with the text: “Make your dream a reality in the United States. We are here to help you,” the caption reads. “The journey is safe and reliable and the price is $4,500 leaving from Monterrey to San Antonio, Texas.” “Someone help me go to the United States,” another person posted to one of the Facebook groups. The post was met with several comments from people providing their smuggling rates, destinations and contact information. “It’s ready. 3,000 to arrive at the line/ 6000 to jump to your destination. Whatever state. Pay when your relatives receive you,” an apparent smuggler wrote. |
| | | | |
| | [[USAToday]] reported, ''Facebook Papers reveal company knew it profited from sex trafficking but took limited action to stop it.'' Facebook made a startling discovery while investigating how people used its products to exploit others: a U.S. sex trafficking network recruiting women from overseas and advertising illegal sexual services in domestic massage parlors. An internal Facebook report was among disclosures made to the [[Securities and Exchange Commission]] and provided to Congress. The internal documents related to a group of sex spas raised questions about whether the social media company could have done more sooner to protect victims and how much it benefitted financially from human trafficking activity on its platforms. They could also land Facebook in hot water legally due to a 2018 law that says internet companies can be held criminally and civilly liable for promoting or facilitating sex trafficking.<ref>https://news.yahoo.com/facebook-papers-reveal-company-knew-154623789.html</ref> | | [[USAToday]] reported, ''Facebook Papers reveal company knew it profited from sex trafficking but took limited action to stop it.'' Facebook made a startling discovery while investigating how people used its products to exploit others: a U.S. sex trafficking network recruiting women from overseas and advertising illegal sexual services in domestic massage parlors. An internal Facebook report was among disclosures made to the [[Securities and Exchange Commission]] and provided to Congress. The internal documents related to a group of sex spas raised questions about whether the social media company could have done more sooner to protect victims and how much it benefitted financially from human trafficking activity on its platforms. They could also land Facebook in hot water legally due to a 2018 law that says internet companies can be held criminally and civilly liable for promoting or facilitating sex trafficking.<ref>https://news.yahoo.com/facebook-papers-reveal-company-knew-154623789.html</ref> |
| Line 265: |
Line 263: |
| | | | |
| | ==Conservative Groupings== | | ==Conservative Groupings== |
| − | While liberalism appears to be the dominant political agenda behind Facebook's staff, this has not stopped conservative groups and pages forming. The [[Conservative Party]] as well as the [[Tea Party Movement]] have created pages. A search of the pages reveals that, when comparing the "likes" system on Facebook, both the Tea Party and the Tea Party Patriots dominate more liberal pages such as "Gay Marriage USA" and even the political ideology page "Liberal". | + | While liberalism appears to be the dominant political agenda behind Facebook's staff, this has not stopped conservative groups and pages from forming. The [[Conservative Party]] as well as the [[Tea Party Movement]] have created pages. A search of the pages reveals that, when comparing the "likes" system on Facebook, both the Tea Party and the Tea Party Patriots dominate more liberal pages such as "Gay Marriage USA" and even the political ideology page "Liberal". |
| | | | |
| | ==''The Social Network''== | | ==''The Social Network''== |
| Line 273: |
Line 271: |
| | | | |
| | ==Privacy issues== | | ==Privacy issues== |
| − | Facebook's Privacy Policy is continuously changing. This is not for the benefit of the users but to the monetary value they represent to advertisers. Due to the size of Facebook, all kinds of data on users' habits are monitored. In fact, the U.S. government can peek at user's lives behind the scenes if it so chooses.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/05/17/13-year-old-boy-questioned-secret-service-facebook-posting/?test=latestnews 13-Year-Old Boy Questioned by Secret Service Over Facebook Posting, Fox News, May 17, 2011]</ref><ref>[http://www.stltoday.com/news/national/govt-and-politics/article_bbd23382-6ecf-11e0-aeef-001a4bcf6878.html Feds mine Facebook for info, STLToday.com, April 25, 2011]</ref> Facebook claims your personal information is not for sale. They make the case that it is anonymously collected data, thereby protecting your privacy. Third parties develop applications to run on top of Facebook. Users' privacy is effectively in the hands of unknown organizations. The below examples include what information is on display by every user. | + | Facebook's Privacy Policy is continuously changing. This is not for the benefit of the users but for the monetary value they represent to advertisers. Due to the size of Facebook, all kinds of data on users' habits are monitored. In fact, the U.S. government can peek at user's lives behind the scenes if it so chooses.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/05/17/13-year-old-boy-questioned-secret-service-facebook-posting/?test=latestnews 13-Year-Old Boy Questioned by Secret Service Over Facebook Posting, Fox News, May 17, 2011]</ref><ref>[http://www.stltoday.com/news/national/govt-and-politics/article_bbd23382-6ecf-11e0-aeef-001a4bcf6878.html Feds mine Facebook for info, STLToday.com, April 25, 2011]</ref> Facebook claims your personal information is not for sale. They make the case that it is anonymously collected data, thereby protecting your privacy. Third parties develop applications to run on top of Facebook. Users' privacy is effectively in the hands of unknown organizations. The below examples include what information is on display by every user. |
| | | | |
| | * The first 6 months of 2013, Facebook shared personal data with the U.S. Government about 39,000 Facebook users.<ref>[http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2013/08/just-peachy-facebook-shared-personal.html?m=0 JUST PEACHY: Facebook shared personal data of users a mere 26 thousand times in the first six months of 2013], [[Doug Ross]], August 27, 2013</ref> | | * The first 6 months of 2013, Facebook shared personal data with the U.S. Government about 39,000 Facebook users.<ref>[http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2013/08/just-peachy-facebook-shared-personal.html?m=0 JUST PEACHY: Facebook shared personal data of users a mere 26 thousand times in the first six months of 2013], [[Doug Ross]], August 27, 2013</ref> |
| − | * The [[NSA]] paid several tech companies, including Facebook, millions of dollars to cover the cost of spying on Americans.<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/23/nsa-prism-costs-tech-companies-paid NSA paid millions to cover Prism compliance costs for tech companies, The Guardian, Augist 22, 2013]</ref> | + | * The [[NSA]] paid several tech companies, including Facebook, millions of dollars to cover the cost of spying on Americans.<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/23/nsa-prism-costs-tech-companies-paid NSA paid millions to cover Prism compliance costs for tech companies, The Guardian, August 22, 2013]</ref> |
| | * 6 million Facebook members had their data exposed after management found a glitch that inadvertently shared personal contact details with other members.<ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57590528-93/facebook-bug-exposed-contact-info-of-6m-users/ Facebook bug exposed contact info of 6M users, CNET.com June 21st, 2013]</ref> | | * 6 million Facebook members had their data exposed after management found a glitch that inadvertently shared personal contact details with other members.<ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57590528-93/facebook-bug-exposed-contact-info-of-6m-users/ Facebook bug exposed contact info of 6M users, CNET.com June 21st, 2013]</ref> |
| | * Many users post their full address, e-mail address, birthday, and telephone number, and these can be available to their entire network (and, in reality, anyone with the ability to use a computer with Internet access). This information in the wrong hands can be used for purposes of phishing, stalking, or even identity theft. | | * Many users post their full address, e-mail address, birthday, and telephone number, and these can be available to their entire network (and, in reality, anyone with the ability to use a computer with Internet access). This information in the wrong hands can be used for purposes of phishing, stalking, or even identity theft. |
| Line 282: |
Line 280: |
| | *The so-called "news feed" has aroused some discomfort among Facebook users, as it displays all changes and status updates from their friends by default. | | *The so-called "news feed" has aroused some discomfort among Facebook users, as it displays all changes and status updates from their friends by default. |
| | *The "wall" feature allows a user to post a message to another user which remains on their profile page. This posting is viewable to everyone who can view the page (which is pretty much the entire world), and shows up on the news feed for all friends of both the sender and the recipient by default. | | *The "wall" feature allows a user to post a message to another user which remains on their profile page. This posting is viewable to everyone who can view the page (which is pretty much the entire world), and shows up on the news feed for all friends of both the sender and the recipient by default. |
| − | *As with Google ads, Facebook collects profile information, and places ads on the page that reflect the user's personal information. This resulted in one man logging into his Facebook account, and seeing his wife's photograph appear in an advertisement for a dating website.<ref>[http://www.kvoa.com/news/husband-finds-wife-in-facebook-singles-ad/] Husband finds wife in facebook singles ad</ref> | + | *As with Google ads, Facebook collects profile information, and places ads on the page that reflect the user's personal information. This resulted in one man logging into his Facebook account, and seeing his wife's photograph appear in an advertisement for a dating website.<ref>[http://www.kvoa.com/news/husband-finds-wife-in-facebook-singles-ad/] Husband finds wife in Facebook singles ad</ref> |
| | *The privacy settings on Facebook give users a false sense of security and encourage people to post valuable personal information that could be used for malicious ends. As with other social networks, Facebook refuses to admit that its privacy settings that apparently allow only "friends" to see certain information are completely bogus and can easily be cracked by people with little to no [[hacking]] experience. Instead, Facebook actually ''encourages'' young users to only allow "friends" to see certain information, rather than just warning them that what they post can be seen by the world and to not post what they wouldn't want people to see.<ref> | | *The privacy settings on Facebook give users a false sense of security and encourage people to post valuable personal information that could be used for malicious ends. As with other social networks, Facebook refuses to admit that its privacy settings that apparently allow only "friends" to see certain information are completely bogus and can easily be cracked by people with little to no [[hacking]] experience. Instead, Facebook actually ''encourages'' young users to only allow "friends" to see certain information, rather than just warning them that what they post can be seen by the world and to not post what they wouldn't want people to see.<ref> |
| | [https://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2008/01/myspace_torrent This is why only a fool would trust any social networking platform to keep any information private]</ref> | | [https://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2008/01/myspace_torrent This is why only a fool would trust any social networking platform to keep any information private]</ref> |
| | * In early 2018, it was revealed that the now-defunct data mining firm Cambridge Analytica had inappropriately acquired about 50 million users' personal information around the time of the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Zuckerberg testified before Congress and announced that he would change Facebook's algorithm, aiming to resolve countless privacy issues. | | * In early 2018, it was revealed that the now-defunct data mining firm Cambridge Analytica had inappropriately acquired about 50 million users' personal information around the time of the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Zuckerberg testified before Congress and announced that he would change Facebook's algorithm, aiming to resolve countless privacy issues. |
| | | | |
| − | As a free service, it is reasonable to say that the users of Facebook are the product, rather than the consumers. As Andrew Lewis is credited with saying, "If you are not paying for it, you're not the customer; you're the product being sold." This concept is not new, but it is still valid even though it was originally introduced in reference to television.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=gI_jNL7PN2QC&lpg=PA104&dq=tv%20you%20are%20the%20product&pg=PA104#v=onepage&q=tv%20you%20are%20the%20product&f=false]</ref> Information is valuable to advertisers, since they can use it in targeted marketing. Facebook, like other social media services, makes use of the personal information provided to users to sell advertisements. | + | As a free service, it is reasonable to say that the users of Facebook are the product, rather than the consumers. As Andrew Lewis is credited with saying, "If you are not paying for it, you're not the customer; you're the product being sold." This concept is not new, but it is still valid even though it was originally introduced in reference to television.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=gI_jNL7PN2QC&lpg=PA104&dq=tv%20you%20are%20the%20product&pg=PA104#v=onepage&q=tv%20you%20are%20the%20product&f=false]</ref> Information is valuable to advertisers since they can use it in targeted marketing. Facebook, like other social media services, makes use of the personal information provided to users to sell advertisements. |
| | | | |
| | ==Initial monetary value== | | ==Initial monetary value== |
| Line 301: |
Line 299: |
| | * [[MySpace]] | | * [[MySpace]] |
| | * [[Google Plus|Google+]] | | * [[Google Plus|Google+]] |
| − | * [[Gab.ai (website)|Gab]] (conservative alternative to twitter) | + | * [[Gab.ai (website)|Gab]] (conservative alternative to Twitter, now X) |
| | * [[Donald Trump and social media]] | | * [[Donald Trump and social media]] |
| | | | |