[csvan]

I suspect this is due to the algorithms handling reports - not an actual human action. Atheist Republic - a massive community for atheists and skeptics on FB - was also taken down after being report-bombed by malicious users, this despite the fact that it was not in serious violation of any FB rules.

[Trombone12]

That would explain another incident recently, where a blog post about leaving a certain political party in Sweden was blocked, while a FB group with the name "legalize rape" was deemed appropriate.

Move fast and break things indeed.

[briandear]

I am not sure I understand the Facebook need to curate anyway. The phone company doesn't censor phone calls.

[gbl08ma]

The phone company doesn't place adverts on your calls, nor suggests products based on the subject of your calls, does it?

Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc. all need to curate so that their platforms stay family-safe, in order to please advertisers and the general public (imagine how bad it would be for e.g. Facebook if the general media started portraying them as supporting e.g. "terrorism").

[icebraining]

The phone company doesn't place adverts on your calls, (...) does it?

Actually, mine does, if you have a certain mobile plan, people who call you get an ad for the plan when its ringing.

[1ris]

>(imagine how bad it would be for e.g. Facebook if the general media started portraying them as supporting e.g. "terrorism").

The general public has to accept there are some things they don't like and still have the right to be there, and stop acting like a spoiled brat. IMHO. Of course that wont happen.

[pjc50]

Only because calls are transient, one-party, and when the telephone was developed automatic censorship wasn't possible.

[hackuser]

> I suspect this is due to the algorithms handling reports - not an actual human action.

I understand your point, but I would add some qualifications:

1) Let's remember that algorithms are human actions. For example, if Facebook created an algorithm that deleted accounts based on user skin color in their photos, it would be a human action.

2) Facebook is a highly sophisticated software company, not someone who downloaded a library without realizing quite what it did. They are especially responsible for what their algorithms do. (To think of it another way, imagine how they would look if they claimed otherwise, 'we don't really understand what our software does'.) EDIT: It's also a consequence of priorities: If the algorithm's quality had a billion dollar impact on their bottom line, there would be no errors.

3) Facebook isn't just a private business. With so much power over the world's political and social communication, they have an obligation to ensure their members freedom of speech.

4) Transparency and remediation is necessary for #3 (and maybe Facebook already has it; I don't know). Such things always can be blamed on an algorithm or computer error.

[nailer]

Argumentative takedowns like this pretty common. I wonder if an account diversity algo could help identify legitimate reports?

[noobie]

I think you mean "bigoted" rather than "malicious".

[Trombone12]

There is no need to be bigoted to be malicious, and indeed you can be bigoted without taking malicious action.

[noobie]

Given that

    malicious: intending or intended to do harm.

    bigoted: having prejudiced intolerance of the opinions of others.

I was only merely pointing out that reporting an atheist page is simply the result of intolerance and not of an intention to harm.

[Dylan16807]

"report-bombing" sounds like something done with intent to harm the community.

[spacehome]

Why not both?