+Red King Subscriber² Posted October 22, 2016 Subscriber² Share Posted October 22, 2016 Quote Report: Facebook Employees Wanted to Censor ‘Hate Speech’ from Trump, ‘Threatened to Quit’Facebook employees rallied the company’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg and even threatened to quit the company over some of Donald Trump’s postings, which they claimed violated the site’s policy on hate speech and community rules, a report from The Wall Street Journal has revealed. The posts in question related to Donald Trump’s comments about a proposed ban on Muslim immigration to the U.S., which they said violated the site’s community standards, arguing the company had double standards in relation to Trump. The argument went all the way up to Facebook’s senior management, with Mark Zuckerberg ruling that the company would not censor the content, prompting furious internal exchanges and leading to their community standards team threatening to quit. Zuckerberg later told a Muslim man at a town hall meeting that he believed Trump’s comments did constitute hate speech, “but said the implications of removing them were too drastic,” according to people who attended the meeting. Meanwhile, Monika Bickert, the company’s head of global policy management, told employees the company wouldn’t take down any of Trump’s postings because of its obligation to be impartial during election cycles. http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/10/21/report-facebook-employees-wanted-to-censor-hate-speech-from-trump-threatened-to-quit/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astra.Xtreme Posted October 22, 2016 Share Posted October 22, 2016 There are sure a lot of liberals out there that don't have the slightest comprehension of the United States Constitution. It's a shame that this country has allowed the protest party to take the reigns and become the laughing stock of the West. Quite an embarrassing time to be an American. Unobscured Vision, DocM and abecedarian paradoxious 3 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unobscured Vision Posted October 22, 2016 Share Posted October 22, 2016 (edited) Oh, careful, that's a "Micro-Aggression". Wouldn't wanna get privvy-checked. [EDIT] (And for the record, I'm not going to. I completely agree with you, in fact.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Gary7 Subscriber² Posted October 22, 2016 Subscriber² Share Posted October 22, 2016 What about The Hate Speech from Clinton? Unobscured Vision and psmoked 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnelsoninjax Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 2 hours ago, Gary7 said: What about The Hate Speech from Clinton? It's acceptable, after all she is going to be the next president! /s And everything that Trump says is evil and must be micro analyzed. DConnell 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoochieMamma Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 That's interesting, yet they can't seem to remove beheading videos and people getting shot in the head/murdered as it doesn't go against their policies? DConnell 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnelsoninjax Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 17 minutes ago, HoochieMamma said: That's interesting, yet they can't seem to remove beheading videos and people getting shot in the head/murdered as it doesn't go against their policies? Policy is all in the eye of the beholder. That way they can pretend that an item that they don't like is offensive, but as you pointed out people getting shot, etc. does not fall under the broad spectrum of 'offensive' but anything that a presidential candidate (specifically the evil Republican) says will be considered offensive, but as @Gary7 pointed out Clinton can say what ever she wants and offend whomever she wants and it is not consider offensive enough to censor/remove/etc. psmoked, DocM and FunkyMike 3 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 9 hours ago, Unobscured Vision said: Oh, careful, that's a "Micro-Aggression". Wouldn't wanna get privvy-checked. [EDIT] (And for the record, I'm not going to. I completely agree with you, in fact.) I would love to tell you what I'd like to do to all these twits that scream "Micro aggression", but sadly, it's against the forum rules! DocM and Unobscured Vision 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 6 hours ago, HoochieMamma said: That's interesting, yet they can't seem to remove beheading videos and people getting shot in the head/murdered as it doesn't go against their policies? The only thing against Facebook policies are a) things that get complained about to the police, and b) things that don't pull in lots of page views and ad revenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abecedarian paradoxious Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 (edited) 9 hours ago, Astra.Xtreme said: There are sure a lot of liberals out there that don't have the slightest comprehension of the United States Constitution. It's a shame that this country has allowed the protest party to take the reigns and become the laughing stock of the West. Quite an embarrassing time to be an American. Well, you have the 60/70's boomers, anti-establishment jokesters running the gov't... and their kids, indoctrinated. Too sad they don't realize they are the establishment they rebelled against. Democrats put the US into Vietnam; Republicans got us out... for instance. Nixon resigned over about 18 minutes of recorded tape, yet Hillary won't give up after how many thousands of emails it would take the average person days to read and many months to correlate. Edited October 23, 2016 by mister babadook DConnell and DocM 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts