| ▲ | dgoldstein0 3 hours ago |
| My bet is that some sort of auto ban logic kicked in, maybe due to abuse of reporting features. It'd if course be worse if a human moderator took it down or affirmed such a decision but not impossible. Meta and other big tech usually over-relies on automated enforcement because it's easier on their wallets than hiring enough moderators to keep up in near-real time. And it's hella easy for a group of motivated people to coordinate flagging of content, which the automation often takes at face value. Clearly having public spaces in private hands like this is tricky, as if we try to require better moderation that ends up to expensive, private interests will probably find a way to just kick anything controversial / political off their platforms. |
|
| ▲ | motionlessveloc 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Agree, especially given the suspension only lasted 90 minutes. If Meta actually wanted to deplatform the No Kings, they would nuke it permanently and handwave terrorism or national security or something. (See also, Reddit's long track record of nuking inconvenient subs like /r/TheDonald, back in the days when they were out of favor.) |
| |
| ▲ | j027 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The suspension that was public facing lasted 90 minutes, but they couldn’t log into the account for hours See https://bsky.app/profile/ezralevin.bsky.social/post/3my43atj... | |
| ▲ | jibalt 17 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | r/TheDonald wasn't nuked because of "inconvenience", but rather because the mods were unable or unwilling to control hate speech, threats of violence, and other abusive behavior. Nor was there a "long track record" -- it was one of about 2000 subs that were nuked in one major purge (many of them were inactive). As for "back in the days", Reddit still bans such behavior. | |
| ▲ | threatofrain an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I'm not sure why you think Meta would take such a heavy approach, as opposed to just the right amount at the right time for the minimal price and the least commitment. |
|
|
| ▲ | missmewiththatl 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| As if auto-moderation is an excuse? In past Meta/Facebook has heavily hired human moderators. We're seriously not going to start abdicating responsibility to automated machines, are we? |
| |
| ▲ | jibalt 11 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | That's a done deal -- Facebook started letting their human moderators (and other contracted workers) go in 2023, and then switched to "free speech" automated moderation in Jan 2025. One of the contributing factors was a $52 million settlement in 2020 for causing PTSD in those human moderators -- dealing with all that abusive shit was very emotionally taxing. | |
| ▲ | landr0id an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Damned if you do. Damned if you don’t. An account was suspended for 90 minutes. Why is the automatic assumption that it was malicious? In fact, if Meta had protections against this I’m sure some people would be crying about “obvious political favoritism”. Hopefully they can move the needle that makes the system in general harder to abuse. But wow, the outrage is insane. | | |
| ▲ | xethos an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | > Why is the automatic assumption that it was malicious? Because the business model is malicious. Meta has, quite intentionally, wedged itself in-between large amounts of human interaction. They know some people are malicious. They know the machine will frequently make the wrong call, because the auto-moderator can neither reason, nor account for context. But hiring enough moderators to run moderation through the computer, provide a default "suggested" action, and having a human approve or deny, would be too expensive. It would demolish their profit, and may even pull Meta from black to red, financially. Their business model relies on making the wrong call, and having outrage bring it to the attention of actual Meta staff to correct it. Meta does not get to blame the computer they put in charge of moderation instead of hiring adequate staff; computers can never be held accountable, so accountability moves up the chain to the people that programmed the computer and left it in charge. | |
| ▲ | nfw2 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | they probably can reduce the error rate and triage false positives basically instantly with ai, but we all know how society feels about that |
| |
| ▲ | nfw2 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | you abdicate responsibility to an automated system whenever you deposit a check into an atm (which you probably don't because you use the banking system in an even more automated way) if the accusation is political cronyism then yes, whether it was automated or discretionary is obviously relevant | |
| ▲ | afavour 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yes, no matter what happened Meta are responsible and should provide answers. There’s still an important distinction to make though: if it was automated then the No Kings page was not deliberately targeted for political reasons. |
|
|
| ▲ | jelloroll42 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Meta put it's thumb in the scale against Lula in Brazil. Why would this be any different? |
|
| ▲ | an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | james_david 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What evidence do you have that it was an autoban? |
| |
| ▲ | biophysboy 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Autobans happen to ad accounts on FB all the time. | | |
| ▲ | brettermeier an hour ago | parent [-] | | And this account posted ads? | | |
| ▲ | biophysboy an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | It is not an ad account - the other reply is stupid. I am saying ad accounts deal with this crap from FB all the time. Add this instance to the pile. It is the price of surrendering comms and marketing to a gigantic behemoth. | |
| ▲ | SV_BubbleTime an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | > And this account posted ads? I mean… it is for a “No Kings” rally. Yes. It’s main job is advertising. Yes. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | kelnos 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Perhaps, but why were the owners of the account then unable to sign into it after it was restored? |
|
| ▲ | iAMkenough 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Hopefully it's a lesson learned by those involved. Don't use platforms like this to organize in the future. |
| |
| ▲ | jibalt 2 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Logic failure. There is no reason to use fewer channels. | |
| ▲ | reverius42 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Don't use the only platforms that have millions of people on them to organize millions of people in the future? | | |
| ▲ | iAMkenough 10 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Yeah. Stuff still gets done without Meta in the loop. They’re not a dependency for democracy. Also curious where the “millions” estimate for No Kings events today comes from. |
| |
| ▲ | afavour 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Come on. You’re not going to organize a political movement over RSS in 2026. | | |
|
