zlacker

Facebook is blocking users from posting stories about its security breach

    Some users are reporting that they are unable to post today’s
    big story about a security breach affecting 50 million
    Facebook users. The issue appears to only affect particular
    stories from certain outlets, at this time one story from The
    Guardian and one from the Associated Press, both reputable
    press outlets.
    ...
    The situation is another example of Facebook’s automated
    content flagging tools marking legitimate content as
    illegitimate, in this case calling it spam.

https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/28/facebook-blocks-guardian-s...

>>0xmohi+(OP)
Which posts are being blocked? The Guardian one and the AP one linked at the top of that post work fine for me.

>>yuliyp+13
Those articles were hitting their spam filter (not sure why reliable news sources won't be whitelisted) which prevented users from posting and deleted posts that were already made.

They may have fixed the "bug" now.

>>0xmohi+(OP)
I posted on Facebook about how the NSA have a profile of everyones race, sexual preference religion etc- it was in the context of the Australian government digital health record scheme, I basically said no point opting out of that if you already have Facebook. The post was gone within 20 minutes, right off my wall. Facebook is a closed platform now, at least in China everyone acknowledges the censorship, in the west were still cencored but the fact that it happens is also cencored.

>>myth_b+y3
It's because the Guardian is not a 'Reputable' new site wholly. It is still remotely published stories that aren't under employees or constant people. I am pretty sure associated Press is the same. They are better than say Rebel, but not much better

>>0xmohi+(OP)
Code formatting makes your comment unreadable on mobile. Any chance one could simply use “>” like everyone else does?

>>kderby+U8
> pretty sure associated Press is the same.

You’re joking, right?

>>kderby+U8
Lol

>>Jedi72+M8
>how the NSA have a profile of everyones race, sexual preference religion etc- it was in the context of the Australian government digital health record scheme,

do you have a good link for this?

>>0xmohi+(OP)
Well, that's not gonna cause a bunch of conspiracy theories at all! Doesn't matter if its automated, this has to be the worst time for something like this issue to occur, since everyone will instantly assume the worst.

>>0xmohi+(OP)
What's going to happen when a world leader dies, or wins an improbable victory in some area? What happens if such a world leader is the public face of some aggrieved political segment? Not just "censorship!", but "a vast techno censorship conspiracy!"

>>0xmohi+(OP)
Believing this is the tech equivalent of believing in chemtrails.

>>discor+xc
I wouldn’t say so. It’s happened too many times for anti Facebook posts, even Google+ back in the day.

Remember, this is a company headed by someone who captured failed login passwords and used them to hack the email accounts of a journalist writing an anti-FB article. Yes, that was a decade ago, but that is a serious, criminal low.

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/flashback-zuckerberg-used-l...

>>dannyw+Ec
C'mon. I'm not a big fan of Zuckerberg but "did some unethical and possibly illegal things on the university network" describes a significant portion of the readers of this site.

>>dannyw+Ec
Never were negative comments censored on these sites. It’s not that they are so ethical but that it would be just dumb to assume they would get away with this. They are just not stupid.

>>briand+Ta
Thanks, didn't know that.