Facebook bans Direct to the People for 30 days before Election

Got banned again by Facebook for 30 days.   Here is the offending post:

Again, Facebook didn’t say how my post goes against the community standards.

(To see what I was banned for the last time, click here:  Facebook Protecting Pedophiles)

This is ludicrous.  The community standards are written so vaguely that almost anything could be banned by Facebook.  If it is “upsetting” to the community.  If that was enforced consistently, the only things allowed on Facebook would be recipes and pictures of cats and puppies.  Oh wait a minute, Muslims hate dogs, so puppies are out.

This is the tyranny of the most easily offended.

Enforced by tyrannical fascist Facebook.

Some conservatives and libertarians argue:

“Well Facebook is a private company, they can do what they want.”

I would agree this applies to most businesses.  But Facebook (and other social media sites) have a key difference.

Facebook has a contract with it’s users.  Unlike for example a random person walking into a bakery.  That customer has no contract with the business and therefore the business should not be obligated to provide service.  Facebook’s community standards are a contract between Facebook and the user when somebody signs up to use Facebook.  Facebook is obligated to live up to that contract.

Facebook is not.  They have written their community standards so vaguely as to cover any censorship they make feel a whim to enforce.

But when they do not enforce the rules consistently to all people or pages?  It shows Facebook is not deciding what to censor based on their vaguely written community standards.  It shows Facebook is overwhelming deciding to censor conservative ideas, people and pages.

That is nowhere in the contract.

It’s worse for a page because many pages spend money to advertise for their page.  Or to boost posts giving them more exposure.  When Facebook bans and deletes pages, that is a loss of something of value.  Because of Facebook’s breach of contract.

And as the law dictates, Facebook should be required to make the parties they have broken a contract with whole.  In terms of monetary damage paid to the offending party.  And potentially punitive damages paid by Facebook for their pattern of breaching contracts with conservatives.

If Facebook wrote into their contract that conservative speech is not allowed?  Then fine, that would be one thing and they’d justified in censoring.  But they didn’t and haven’t.  Because they know that would be unpopular.  Instead they censor in practice and then hide behind vaguely written community standards as cover.

This is a breach of contract on their part and I will be looking into legal recourse.


Share this article: Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinmail

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *