Facebook Acknowledges Its Own Censorship on Julio Severo. What Happens Now?
Even though not using the term “censorship”
for its censoring act, Facebook recognized it “accidentally removed” an article
I had posted on Facebook on June 19.
The removal was followed by an
unfair action by Facebook — a 30-day ban on my ability to post, like, comment
and communicate on my own Facebook profile. Even though the “mistake” has been officially
recognized, the ban imposed by Facebook has not been removed and my Facebook
account remains blocked for my personal use, in spite of my several complaints
to Facebook letting them know that their ban is a complete mistake.
The
original post, which was the reason for Facebook to block me, was just the
title and link of my article (Brazilian Neighbors Are Ordered to Pay US$4,500
For Calling a Homosexual “Fag” http://bit.ly/2sMZlZg),
which, by the way, made it abundantly clear that I oppose name-calling and foul
language.
My
subsequent article, “Facebook,
Censorship, Profanity, Name-Calling and Foul Language,” also
confirmed that I oppose name-calling and foul language.
Even so, the censorship, imposed on
June 19, continued unabated. Then, on June 23, the California-based Freedom of
Conscience Defense Fund sent an official legal letter to Mr. Colin Stretch,
Esq., General Counsel at Facebook. Its letter said,
Mr. Stretch,
On Monday, June 19, 2017, a post made to
Facebook by user Julio Severo, a Brazilian national, was removed and his
account (facebook.com/julio.severo) suspended for 30 days either through the
workings of an automated system or by a human curator. We have been asked by
Julio to contact you on his behalf to demand the ending of his account
suspension and reinstatement of his post as both actions violated Facebook’s
Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, as revised January 30, 2015.
The post linked to an entry from Mr.
Severo’s personal blog with a headline reading: “Brazilian Neighbors Are
Ordered to Pay US$4,500 For Calling a Homosexual ‘Fag’” Mr. Severo was given no
warning and his attempts to communicate with Facebook staff regarding the
removal have been met with silence. Mr. Severo assumes it is the presence of
the word “fag” that led to the account suspension.
As the title of
his post indicates, Mr. Severo was reporting a newsworthy event which occurred
in his home country. The word “fag” was properly placed in quotation marks to
reflect that it was the criminal defendants, and not Mr. Severo himself, who
were responsible for using the epithet. The post was written to criticize his
country’s judicial system for what he believes is too severe a punishment, but
his post makes clear he does not approve of the language used by defendants.
Whether or not Facebook or a subset of its users find the punishment proper,
Mr. Severo’s actions did not violate the Statement of Rights and Responsibilities,
a binding contract. Rather, the removal of the post, and suspension of his
account, did violate that contract.
According to the
Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, part 3 “Safety”, paragraphs 6 and 7,
users agree that: “1. You will not bully, intimidate, or harass any user. 2.
You will not post content that: is hate speech, threatening, or pornographic;
incites violence; or contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence.”
Similarly, Facebook’s Community Standards, states under the heading “Hate
Speech”: “Facebook removes hate speech, which includes content that directly
attacks people based on their … sexual orientation, sex, gender, or gender
identity…”
Mr. Severo’s
blog post, including its headline, does not direct an offensive term toward any
specific user or use offensive language to describe any person. Reporting the
use of the word by others in the context of reporting the outcome of a criminal
proceeding does not constitute bullying, intimidation, harassment, or a “direct
attack.” Whether Facebook or a subset of its users disagree with Mr. Severo’s
political or religious views, or are even subjectively “offended” by them, he
did not objectively violate the terms of use of the site nor direct hateful,
threatening, or harassing language toward others.
Facebook’s
Community Standards also state under “Hate Speech”: “People can use Facebook to
challenge ideas, institutions, and practices. Such discussion can promote
debate and greater understanding.” Mr. Severo’s post was written with the goal
of challenging the legal system and social norms of his home country and thus
falls within the scope of allowable content on Facebook.
On Tuesday, June
20, 2017, Mr. Severo submitted an appeal through Facebook’s website explaining
how his actions did not violate the Statement of Rights and Responsibilities.
Mr. Severo’s inquiry has so far been ignored, and the restrictions on his
account maintained. The continued suspension of Mr. Severo’s account is
improper and constitutes breach of contract. Please remove that suspension by June
30, 2017, and reinstate Mr. Severo’s post, in order to avoid legal action.
Sincerely,
FREEDOM OF
CONSCIENCE DEFENSE FUND
Facebook
sent me its official answer on July 3, 2017:
A member of our
team accidentally removed something you posted on Facebook. This was a mistake,
and we sincerely apologize for this error. We've since restored the content,
and you should now be able to see it.
Notwithstanding Facebook’s
acknowledgment that my article’s removal, which was followed by an unfair blockage
on my account, was an alleged “mistake” made by a member of the Facebook team, as
of July 5 my Facebook profile remains blocked.
My
Facebook profile remains visible to others, but it is functionally “dead.” I
have been blocked from posting, liking, commenting and communicating through my
profile since June 19.
Portuguese version of this article: Facebook reconhece sua própria censura contra Julio
Severo. E agora?
Recommended
Reading:
No comments :
Post a Comment