"Like" if you think Facebook is Anti-Semitic/Anti-Israel

[The Rabbi]

Great article in the WSJ. Yes the animus against Jews and Israel is strong. You see it on here as well.
Facebook and Israel: What’s Not to ‘Like’? Lots, It Seems

The design was simple: Create two Facebook pages, one anti-Palestinian and one anti-Israeli. Then report them to Facebook as violating its user rules, e.g., against hate speech and incitements to violence. Then wait and see what happens.
For purposes of the study, Shurat HaDin posted twin messages on both pages, one page called Stop Israel and the other Stop Palestine. The messages featured increasingly inflammatory material—including “Revenge against the Arab enemy” and “Death to all the Arabs” on the anti-Palestinian page—with the matching “Revenge against the Jewish enemy” and “Death to all the Jews” on the anti-Israeli page.
Shurat HaDin also posted graphic photos on both pages. For example, a photograph on the anti-Israel page featured a young girl preparing to punch an Israeli soldier, with text reading, “these children will liberate Palestine with blood.” That photograph was mirrored on the anti-Palestine page by a picture of a bare-chested Israeli soldier wielding a gun and vowing war with all Arabs.
On Dec. 30, Shurat HaDin reported both pages as violating Facebook standards, using Facebook’s report mechanism of a simple button-click available to all users. Within 24 hours, Facebook sent the NGO a message that the anti-Palestine page it reported had been closed down for “containing credible threat of violence” and that it had “violated our [Facebook’s] community standards.” The page immediately became inaccessible to all Facebook users.
The complaint about the anti-Israel page (which had spiraled into an explicitly anti-Jewish page) also received a reply from Facebook. This reply stated that the content was “not in violation of Facebook’s rules.”
Facebook changed its tune after Jan. 4, when Shurat HaDin published a video detailing the experiment, which made waves in the Israeli press and on social media. After taking down the anti-Israel page, Facebook released a statement on Jan. 5 saying that “Facebook does not tolerate hate speech, including against people on the basis of their nationality. We review all reports and take down such content. Both these pages have now been removed from Facebook.”
more at the source

 

[JakeStarkey]

Good to see the freedom to publish can correct some punk administrator's bias at Facebook.

 

[Snouter]

"Anti semitic" and "anti-israel" are faggotry concepts beyond any faggorty in history. Jews are racist, and or insane. Being against racism and insanity is GOOD not bad.

 

[NightFox]

Not sure if the results of this experiment could be properly characterized as suggesting that Facebook as an organization is "anti-semetic/anti-Isreal" it rather looks more like one could conclude that the Facebook employee(s) that were doing the reviewing in this case might be "anti-semetic/anti-Isreal".

In order for one to conclude that the organization leans that way one would have to have a much bigger sample size and demonstrate that "reviewers" were acting on management direction and/or existing company policy.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The Zionists see hatred everywhere, and are unable to understand why...

 

[The Rabbi]

"Anti semitic" and "anti-israel" are faggotry concepts beyond any faggorty in history. Jews are racist, and or insane. Being against racism and insanity is GOOD not bad.

I believe you are racist and insane.
And on my Iggy list.

 

[The Rabbi]

Not sure if the results of this experiment could be properly characterized as suggesting that Facebook as an organization is "anti-semetic/anti-Isreal" it rather looks more like one could conclude that the Facebook employee(s) that were doing the reviewing in this case might be "anti-semetic/anti-Isreal".

In order for one to conclude that the organization leans that way one would have to have a much bigger sample size and demonstrate that "reviewers" were acting on management direction and/or existing company policy.

You would have to assume that employees have discretion and are free to ignore company guidance, assuming there is such guidance in the first place.
Or do you subscribe to the idea that the IRS scandal was simply a few rogue employees in the Cincinnati office?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Israel was conducting air raids against Palestinian patriots yesterday,

but hasn't lifted a finger to fight ISIS.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Israel was conducting air raids against Palestinian patriots yesterday,

but hasn't lifted a finger to fight ISIS.

Only Zionists can be Freedom Fighters. Literally everyone else is denounced as an anti-Semite, even anti-Zionist Jews.

 

[NightFox]

Not sure if the results of this experiment could be properly characterized as suggesting that Facebook as an organization is "anti-semetic/anti-Isreal" it rather looks more like one could conclude that the Facebook employee(s) that were doing the reviewing in this case might be "anti-semetic/anti-Isreal".

In order for one to conclude that the organization leans that way one would have to have a much bigger sample size and demonstrate that "reviewers" were acting on management direction and/or existing company policy.

You would have to assume that employees have discretion and are free to ignore company guidance, assuming there is such guidance in the first place.

No would only have to assume that human beings are human beings and thus are capable of subjective interpretations of guidance as well as content and/or willfully ignoring directions from their superiors.

Or do you subscribe to the idea that the IRS scandal was simply a few rogue employees in the Cincinnati office?

What the hell does the IRS scandal have to do with this topic? Or were you just honing your straw man building skills?

 

[The Rabbi]

Not sure if the results of this experiment could be properly characterized as suggesting that Facebook as an organization is "anti-semetic/anti-Isreal" it rather looks more like one could conclude that the Facebook employee(s) that were doing the reviewing in this case might be "anti-semetic/anti-Isreal".

In order for one to conclude that the organization leans that way one would have to have a much bigger sample size and demonstrate that "reviewers" were acting on management direction and/or existing company policy.

You would have to assume that employees have discretion and are free to ignore company guidance, assuming there is such guidance in the first place.

No would only have to assume that human beings are human beings and thus are capable of subjective interpretations of guidance as well as content and/or willfully ignoring directions from their superiors.

Or do you subscribe to the idea that the IRS scandal was simply a few rogue employees in the Cincinnati office?

What the hell does the IRS scandal have to do with this topic? Or were you just honing your straw man building skills?

That is simply wrong, given the fact pattern here.
Well if you think institutional action can be simply individuals acting on their own rather than carrying out policy then you can believe the IRS scandal was just a few rogue agents.
Do you?

 

[NightFox]

That is simply wrong, given the fact pattern here.

There is no pattern here, the sample size is ONE which does not establish a pattern.

Well if you think institutional action can be simply individuals acting on their own rather than carrying out policy then you can believe the IRS scandal was just a few rogue agents.
Do you?

I don't think individuals can act outside the direction of the institution that they are a part of, I KNOW they can but I take the time to look at the actual facts of the case in point before making any judgement as to whether or not systemic prejudice is involved, I don't rely on partisan litmus tests to draw my conclusions.

Now take your weak straw men arguments elsewhere there are no buyers at this house.