Censorship Can Be Merely Other Peoples Playground Rules You Don't Like

In the true manner of, "a man in a pub told me" I received this forwarded email from someone in da family a while ago:
If this is true (bearing in mind the apparent censorship that has happened in the UK), then this is really serious...

Via a retweet from Gervais:


Sent from my iPhone

My response

Yip ... Facebook,. of course, has no need to explain itself as it's a privately owned (to all real means) US-based organisation. It is not a British media organisation it's not a "platform" - it is a privately owned website. Just like my blog, I get to choose what goes on it, so do they.

If that's not understood then that's a little sad, eh.

As for mainstream media in the UK, they are also private (well, privately run, owned by large financial organisations) that get to something similar. They are slightly less free as they have some UK legalities to comply with but I'm sure (thought not certain) that there's nothing that says they HAVE to print/broadcast something.

That leaves the BBC. And that's a worry.
I know Robert has been ranting about the lack of BBC voice to echo the people of the UK for quite sometime and it seems he as been right to do so.

AND, of course, this might not be malicious humans with evil intent but bad algorithms detecting unforeseen patterns within the Facebook code. This was the case with some goo.gl shortlinks I tried to post a while back and both Google and Facebook recognised it as a problem and sorted out the systems (ie, they wrote better code).

Maybe it was just that.

However, one needs to be aware of the playground rules you play in when dealing with Facebook, Twitter, Google and other privately owned platforms. If those rules aren't what you want, find others or do it yourself (run your own website/blog).


Popular articles

The Difference Between One Million And One Billion

[UPDATE] Mayor 1883

Catastrotivity, The How To

High Moon

NO! The Greatest Story: Space Worm