FB censorship, threat of, causes concern

FB censorship exists, it happens, and its direction and methods should concern us.  It makes me wonder and a bit apprehensive, but of the relatively infrequent announcements and advisories that FB addresses to me now and then, there was one I read this morning. I did not copy it, but I remember some of what it contained, a hint, a faint impression of a threat of censorship.  It made me feel apprehensive and confused.  I have no idea why FB sent me what appears to be a reminder.  Checking the FB Community Standards against what I have been trying to do all along is no help.  I checked them before and now again, and I cannot figure out why I received what seems a nudge, a poke, a suggestion that I am treading on dangerous grounds. leaving me confused.  Was the poke a result of something I wrote?  Did I come close to violating the boundaries of proper FB behaviour?

FB told me that it is always concerned that every member of the FB community has good experiences and suggested that I visit the FB community standards to be able to appreciate its efforts to that extent and what those standards are.  It did not allude to anything I had done, while the implication was that I had committed an offence.

FB Censorship Community Standards

FB Censorship Community Standards

There are many forms of FB censorship, such as that all of my FB postings are for public consumption, marked as such, but yet, when they are being read by the intended parties, the members of the general FB public, they don’t at times show a <Share> button.  That  will discourage most people from sharing them, even though they fully agree or (more rarely) disagree with what the posting brings to their attention.  Copy-and-paste commands are more inconvenient than to point the cursor to and to click on <Share>.

There have been postings I made that not everyone else will see, and not necessarily on account of their privacy settings.  There is one of the ultimate forms of FB censorship, the “FB censorship jail”, into which someone may be and at times is being put for making offensive postings.  What lands any offender in “FB censorship jail” cannot be discerned.  There is an obvious disconnect between what the FB censors decide and what the FB community standards specify the FB clients are supposed to be following.

It is not necessarily a vile posting that causes someone to land in “FB censorship jail”.  A lot of those come across the screen of my PC, containing extremely offensive language, even awfully pornographic content or extremely derogatory and abusive statements concerning lawfully and democratically elected politicians.  Those do not necessarily trigger FB censorship, while postings displaying a lack of sensitivities concerning political correctness may.  It appears that assertions matter.  The objective truth does not, by far, matter as much to the FB censorship algorithms as does whether something is politically incorrect, especially when anyone asserts in writing to FB censorship operators that he was offended by what he read or saw in a posting, largely regardless of what actually was in it.  The alleged perception of that someone was or possibly could be offended appears to be a trigger of FB censorship, not so much whether an offence actually occurred.

FB censorship protects against reality?  Whose reality?

FB censorship protects against reality? Whose reality? 
What do the FB Community Standards promote?
Is gender confusion desired? I common sense out, and second-guessing the unfathomable, capricious perception of FB censors in?
Anything but traditional ethics and standards…? Who knows?

What I read between those lines of the FB advisory that FB addressed to me is not anything that FB put there but merely a creation of my imagination, leaving me slightly puzzled. It was not said in that announcement or advisory that I had been threatened with censorship, and it surely is a creation of my imagination that I had been threatened with that after having made a few postings on my timeline yesterday, 2017 12 22.

The FB advisory suggested that I look up the FB community standards, standards that exist, apparently, to ensure that every member of the FB community will have pleasant experiences. It appears that FB and I form a good relationship. I see nothing in those FB community standards that indicates otherwise, which makes me happy. It makes me happy to see that my efforts in that direction have been good ones, and that the apprehension I felt upon reading the FB suggestion this morning must have been a baseless consequence of the figments of my imagination.  Still, what I feel is necessary obviously is less important than what inscrutable FB censorship operators decide applies.

I am glad that FB’s community standards do not rule out (not even when I read between the lines) honesty, corroborating of observations with facts, and plain old objectivity, and I am sure that no one can fault me of making a habit of offending the standards prescribed for credibility in journalism, the five Ws that stand for Who, What, Where, When, and Why.  Is it possible to be objective about the truth without being on the side of the truth?  The FB censors will not state whether that is permissible, but they do demand that nothing must ever offend anyone in the FB community.  Unfortunately, that then becomes a very grave handicap for any proponent of the objective truth, and a big advantage for what is politically correct.

Many FB postings I see do not adhere as intensely to absolute standards for the truth, whereupon at times I exercise my duty and the right to freedom of expression and refrain from passing those examples of poor taste and lack of common decency (except in extremely rare cases, to illustrate obnoxious excesses) on to anyone else. After all, again reading between the lines, I have the impression that it is an enormously difficult task for FB to ride herd on so much information being exchanged by so many people, and FB most certainly needs some help with that. Nothing is perfect, and not even FB can be, but FB most certainly tries. FB deserves much credit for that.

I am happy to be able to help out with making the FB experience a good one for all members of the FB community, safe in the knowledge that FB will never force any of its clients to partake of anything those don’t wish to be offended by, simply by allowing them to ignore anything they freely chose to ignore, through nothing more demanding than at most to point and click a mouse.  Nevertheless, FB seems to be creating an undercurrent that will carry all of its clientele into the direction of political correctness, furthermore making sure of the best speed at which that will happen, by assuming that the FB clientele comprise minor children who cannot decide what is good for them.

Without a doubt, there are some people now and then who are easily offended by the truth and insist on their right to express their allegation of being offended, even outraged by it. Some may go so far as to block the ostensible offender or even to complain about him. Never fear, FB cares so much about making the FB experience a good one, that it not only permits freedom of expression for extremely vile postings but it must surely adhere to the constitutional right of everyone to be assumed innocent until proven guilty.

A truly democratic forum, where freedom of expression governs, public opinion decides in the end not necessarily what is right but what is acceptable, whereas censorship by an overbearing superpower will counteract and destroy freedom of expression on the forum it created and provided.  Surely the FB powers know that, and that to act against that standard of freedom of expression will easily make the FB venue a very powerful tool for indoctrinating potentially billions of people to become politically correct.

This entry was posted in Censorship, Social-Destruction Enterprise, The New World Order. Bookmark the permalink.