[News] Fascist Facebook? The Social Network Giant's Double Standards
Anti-Imperialist News
news at freedomarchives.org
Fri Jan 10 12:31:08 EST 2014
Weekend Edition January 10-12, 2014
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/01/10/fascist-facebook/
*The Social Network Giant's Double Standards*
Fascist Facebook?
by BEN NORTON
Is Facebook flirting with fascism? The question might prove difficult to
answer with a resounding "yes or no," but, to those who have been
keeping track of its recent censorship practices, the answer appears to
lean heavily toward the affirmative.
Yesterday, on 9 January 2014, after over five years of operation,
popular Facebook page Anarchist Memes was permanently taken down by
Facebook. With approximately 90,000 likes and hundreds of comments each
day, Anarchist Memes established itself as one of the radical left's
most prominent Facebook pages. It posted feminist, anti-racist,
pro-LGBT*QA, and anti-capitalist content numerous times a day. For
years, the page and its administrators experienced endless harassment
and trolling, yet it demonstrated an outstanding, resolute commitment to
establishing a safe, non-oppressive digital environment. Racism,
misogyny, cisheterosexism, ableism, classism, anti-Islamic prejudice,
and other forms of bigotry were never tolerated. The page's many
administrators have, true to the cooperative anarchist tradition,
created a democratic system of accountability to determine how to delete
particular oppressive comments, as to prevent needless censorship while
simultaneously creating a genuinely nonthreatening, non-hierarchical
space for readers---a true rarity on the internet today.
Facebook, nonetheless, demonstrated on numerous occasions that such a
feminist, anti-racist, anti-cisheteronormative environment would not be
tolerated. The page was flagged numerous times for content that
"violated" Facebook's Community Standards
<https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards> and "Statement of Rights
and Responsibilities <https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms>," rather
ambiguously-delineated guidelines that suggest a commitment to liberal
principles without dabbling in the difficulties that come with
concretely articulating the specific moral values on which those
principles are based. Facebook claims to be opposed to expression that
supports "Violence and Threats," "Bullying and Harassment," "Hate
Speech," "Graphic Content," and "Nudity and Pornography." In actual
practice, however, it is clear that the company is only opposed to
particular kinds of violence, harassment, hate speech, and more.
Just a few months ago, Facebook generated much controversy for its
intransigent refusal to remove photos glorifying rape and violence
against women. Soraya Chemaly wrote of "Facebook's big misogyny problem
<http://bennorton.com/facebook-flirting-with-fascism/Facebook%27s%20big%20misogyny%20problem>,"
noting Facebook takes no issue in hosting pages like "I kill b**ches
like you" and "Domestic Violence: Don't Make Me Tell You Twice,"
featuring scores of photos of beaten women. These individual pages were
taken down as a result of the controversy the article generated, yet,
today, many similar misogynist pages still exist. Spreading even more
egg on its face, Facebook proceeded to lash out against those critiquing
its censorship practices, blocking administrators of feminist pages who
uploaded pictures protesting the site's misogyny
<http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/31/facebook-locks-out-campaigner-women>.
A page titled "Rapebook <https://www.facebook.com/StopRapebook>" was
formed to protest Facebook's misogynist practices. It explained that
Facebook had no problem with "collections of pictures of naked children
or very graphical [sic] pictures of victims of all sorts of violence and
incidents." After a bit of press coverage was generated around this
issue, Facebook quickly deleted the child porn, but allowed pages
"lathered with sexually explicit comments" to continue posting,
unhindered. Rapebook began to report content that "promote[d] hate
speech towards minorities" or took "enjoyment in crimes like rape and
murder," but Facebook refused to remove the material, calling it
"controversial humor."
At the same moment, Facebook had no problem targeting what was obviously
feminist activism. In the words of Rapebook administrators, it will
"leave a picture of a woman who lies, obviously physically hurt, at the
bottom of stairs, captioned 'next time don't get pregnant'. At the same
time Facebook will delete a picture, taken from a news item, of a woman
who displayed her breasts at a political protest and temporarily ban all
the administrators of a page that displayed it." Administrators of pages
that regularly promoted violence and threats, bullying and harassment,
hate speech, and graphic content subsequently sicced their fans on the
administrators of Rapebook. The latter began to regularly receive death
threats, harassment, and more explicit content on their page, but
Facebook insisted that such comments did not entail violations of its
hallowed "Community Standards."
Rapebook declared itself no longer active on 5 April 2013, writing it
had "achieved what it was set up to do. It has shown that Facebook's
terms and conditions are null and void. We will leave the rest of the
work for Facebook to do -- or not." Much to the chagrin of any seeker of
justice, it appears as though Facebook has chosen the "or not" option.
Anarchist Memes has been one among Facebook's many political targets.
The company's attack on the page stands as a salient example of how
Facebook's Community /Double/ Standards work in actual practice. In the
past several years, Facebook has removed harmless material and banned
administrators many a time. In the past months, this censorship has been
particularly vehement, with several instances of the company removing
Anarchist Memes' content. In each incident, Facebook's reasoning was
needlessly severe at best, flagrantly reactionary at worst.
In the first incident, Anarchist Memes posted a picture of a Klansman
who had accidentally set himself, instead of a large wooden cross, on
fire, accompanied by the words "IRONY, it strikes at the best of times."
Facebook took the picture down, claiming it violates its community
standards.
KKK IRONY
In the second incident, Facebook took down a picture featuring a
portrait of famous Ukrainian anarchist communist Nestor Mahkno with the
text "You may be anti-racist... but are you shoot anti-Semites on sight
anti-racist?" Again, Facebook took the picture down and banned several
of the page's administrators.
Makhno & anti-Semites
Some might argue that removing these two instances could be justified
according to Facebook's "Violence and Threats" guideline. Neither of the
two constitutes a threat, by any stretch of the imagination, but the two
might be considered violent, if one were loose enough with the
definition. The problem, of course, arises in that Facebook has no
problem conveniently applying a much more specific definition of the
term when it comes to allowing sadistic images of, say, rapist men
beating their partners, but it takes issue with harming racists.
Strange? Of course, but this is how the corporation's Community Double
Standards work.
While these first two pictures might be contested vis--à--vis Facebook's
"terms and conditions," the third and fourth instances of Facebook
censoring Anarchist Memes in these past months are so resoundingly
draconian as to verge on the absurd.
In the third, Anarchist Memes posted a picture simply reading "Some
women have penises. Get over it!" No violence, no graphic image (no
image at all), no nudity, no pornography, simply text that happens to
say the word "penis." Facebook, however, took the photo down and banned
some of the page's administrators. Transphobic much? Facebook apologists
would argue in the negative; those who have been keeping track of
Facebook's well-documented transphobic and homophobic tendencies in the
past few years, on the other hand, would know that the site has an ugly
history of allowing anti-LGBT*QA hate speech
<http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/06/03/facebook-belatedly-remove-transphobic-hate-page/>.
some women have penises get over it
In the fourth incident, Anarchist Memes posted an Eat That Toast!
cartoon depicting how strange stalkers who consider themselves "nice
guys" really look to others. So-called "men's rights 'activists'" went
berserk. While Facebook might have puerilely objected to the use of the
word "penis" in the third instance---an instance of censorship that can
hardly be justified in light of its allowance of sexually violent
comments on countless bigoted pages---in this fourth case, the
censorship absolutely, positively cannot be justified.
nice guys mra bullshit cartoon
In response to this ridiculous censorship, only several weeks ago,
Anarchist Memes declared a "Feminist Week," devoting itself to posting
more feminist material than usual. It changed the header of its site to
feature eminent anarchist Emma Goldman, and changed its characteristic
logo from the red and black that traditionally signify
anarcho-syndicalism and anarcho-communism to the purple and black that
signify anarcha-feminism.
This brings us to yesterday. 9 January 2014 was the last straw. Facebook
took Anarchist Memes down for good.
Anarchist Memes unpublished
Anarchist Memes has since appealed Facebook's decision, in last efforts
to get the site back up, but the chances do not look good. In the
meantime, the page's administrators have not given up. They revived an
old version of the page that had been created as a backup (because of
similar problems in the past with harsh Facebook censorship) but had
been inactive for months. In just one day, this new Anarchist Memes page
<http://www.facebook.com/anarchistmemes1> garnered over 2000 new
likes---a telltale sign that Anarchist Memes has developed a community
of committed activists around the world devoted to fighting oppression
in all of its forms.
An Anarchist Memes administrator provided a statement on the affair.
White supremacist groups have their Facebook pages allowed up and
are able to get away with whatever racist material they want to
post, but anti-capitalist, feminist, and anti-racist pages are
constantly harassed by MRAs [so-called "men's rights 'activists'"],
ancaps [so called "'anarcho'-capitalists"], white nationalists, and
fascists and Facebook will take down those pages without batting an
eye. I have reported several posts from pages that were overtly
bigoted and had Facebook tell me that it doesn't violate their
standards and that I need to read their rules and stop abusing the
reporting process.
The moral of the story: You can post pictures of men beating women; but
you can't mention the mere existence of a particular sexual organ on a
transgender individual. You can post racist, white supremacist content
until the cows come home, but, if you criticize creepy male stalkers,
you will be banned. This is Facebook. It uses its ambiguous "terms and
conditions" to its advantage. It can cry "Graphic content!" or "Nudity!"
when it opposes particular content, and it can allow graphic content and
nudity go unaddressed when it is not opposed to it.
If this were any other website, perhaps the issue would not be as big of
a deal. After all, the mainstream corporate media publishes racist,
misogynist, cisheterosexist, ableist, classist, and anti-Islamic
material quite regularly. Facebook, however, is an interesting beast
because it is such an important website, culturally, socially, and
economically.
It is common for individuals, especially those influenced by the
right-"libertarian" movement in the U.S., to say "Well, if you don't
like Facebook, just stop using it." These are the same people who say,
"If you don't like your job, boss, and/or work environment, then just
quit and start your own small business"---as though anyone can simply
drop everything and find the capital to start a small business---the
very same ones who insist, "If you are racially and/or sexually harassed
at that store, then just stop going there and shop somewhere else"---as
though that is always a tenable economic opportunity. For those of us in
the /real/ world, however, we see that life is never, under any
circumstance, this simple. Utilization of Facebook is not a matter
merely of "use it if you want; don't use it if you don't."
Facebook is a not just a private corporation; Facebook is a crucial
component of contemporary popular culture. Facebook is a place and an
activity that large portions of the world use today. According to a 2013
Pew study on the social networking practices of Americans
<http://pewinternet.org/Commentary/2012/March/Pew-Internet-Social-Networking-full-detail.aspx>,
as of September 2013, 71% of online adults use Facebook (the numbers for
young adults are even higher). For many people, Facebook is essentially
a required social activity. For those who do not wish to become social
pariahs, it has become an obligatory ritual, an inextricable part of the
contemporary global sociocultural fabric. For organizations, clubs,
artists, musicians, bands, writers, photographers, fans of all sorts,
and more, it is an invaluable, nonpareil way to spread the word, to
connect like-minded individuals around the globe.
When such a critical part of global human culture, when the world's /de
facto/ social media platform, is privatized, monetized, owned by a
private company whose primary concern is not creating a safe,
non-oppressive environment in which individuals can share their
experiences, interests, and ideas with one another without fear of
harassment or attack, but rather extracting profit from every possible
social interaction, there is great reason to be concerned. Facebook's
attack on Anarchist Memes has demonstrated that Facebook's bigotry
extends beyond misogyny, beyond an unwillingness to take down pages that
are blatantly white supremacist, racist, fascist, cisheterosexist, and
more. Facebook's censorship practices are political.
In making this point, I am not suggesting that Facebook has chosen to
harshly target Anarchist Memes strictly because the page is explicitly
anarchist; I would, however, posit that discounting such a point
entirely would prove a fool's errand. In mainstream Western public
consciousness, the term anarchy still carries absurd connotations of
chaos and violence; the term is often employed as a synonym for
"disorder." Actual anarchism, on the other hand, has a long and noble
history of devotion to human justice, equality, and liberation, boasting
some of human history's most important political thinkers, figures, and
organizations, including Peter Kroptokin, Noam Chomsky, Goldman, Makhno,
the IWW, Revolutionary Catalonia, the Free Territory, the autonomous
Shinmin region, the Zapatistas, Abahlali baseMjondolo, and much, much more.
Historically speaking, the anarchist movement adopted an intersectional
approach to oppression decades before other radical left movements,
indefatigably criticizing cisheteronormativity, misogyny, and racism at
a time when some well-established Marxist-Leninist parties were overtly
discriminating against members for being Jewish, or for refusing to
conform to a heterosexual, cisgender binary, considering homosexuality
(and feminism) "bourgeois decadence." Fortunately, today, the vast
majority of the radical left (including most Marxist-Leninists) has
adopted the intersectional approach to oppression pioneered by many
anarchist organizations, and has too incorporated anarchism's invaluable
ideals of direct-democratic organization, horizontalism, direct action,
and more. Ignorant of this history, many might, without any research,
side with Facebook in its reactionary criticism of Anarchist Memes,
justifying knee-jerk partisanism with tired, historically baseless
myths. Anarchist Memes, nevertheless, was guilty of nothing save for
doing its best to fight back digitally against the racism, patriarchy,
and cisheteronormativity that dominate mainstream discourse and culture.
All of this established, it is important that I herein offer one final,
yet very significant comment. Although Facebook's censorship practices
are certainly political, they do not evince some kind of right-wing
conspiracy to silence all leftist dissent. It is important that we do
not adopt this kind of conspiratorial conception of the site. The
problem is not that Facebook hires a bunch of racist, misogynist,
cisheterosexist moderators to ban content they deem problematic. Nay,
Facebook is a corporation. Like all economic institutions operating
within a capitalist system, its only commitment is ultimately to its
shareholders. It may (and does) make political decisions in that
process, but its exclusive goal is to increase its profit. Any political
decisions necessarily contribute to this exclu$ive goal.
Accordingly, Facebook has outsourced as much of its labor as possible.
The Telegraph ran a story in March of 2012 titled "The Dark Side of
Facebook
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/9118778/The-dark-side-of-Facebook.html>,"
explaining that actual human beings are the ones doing Facebook
moderation, not bots, not algorithms, and that these people are located
in the so-called Third World. They are underpaid, overworked, exploited
workers who merely follow the rules they are told to follow. An
ex-worker described his work day as one in which he sits for hours
flagging pictures of "Paedophilia, necrophilia, beheadings, suicides,
etc.", admitting "I left [because] I value my sanity." Another worker, a
21-year-old Moroccan, explained "It's humiliating. They are just
exploiting the third world." These moderators---located in Morocco,
Turkey, the Philippines, Mexico, and India---have three options when
confronted with flagged content: "delete it; ignore it; or escalate it,
which refers it back to a Facebook employee in California (who will, if
necessary, report it to the authorities)."
The problem is not with these moderators. This isn't some right-wing
contingent, bent on silencing all of the world's activists; they, like
most of us in the global capitalist economy, are exploited workers,
seeking simply to put bread on the table. We should not blame them for
following the orders of their superiors, nor should we blame them for
"missing" racist, misogynist, and cisheterosexist content.
Facebook might try to defer responsibility, to blame its employees---a
common practice among powerful corporations enduring public
scrutiny---but the problem isn't with its employees, mere individuals
working within a corporate institution. The problem is with the
structure. The problem is with Facebook's Community Double Standards.
The problem is with Facebook itself.
/*Ben Norton* is an artist and activist. His website can be found at
http://bennorton.com/ <http://www.bennorton.com/>./
--
Freedom Archives 522 Valencia Street San Francisco, CA 94110 415
863.9977 www.freedomarchives.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20140110/89cf0ed8/attachment.htm>
More information about the News
mailing list