Revealed: Facebook's internal rulebook on sex, terrorism and violence: LEAKED POLICIES
Source: The Guardian
21 May 2017
Leaked policies guiding moderators on what content to allow are likely to fuel debate about social media giants ethics.
Facebooks secret rules and guidelines for deciding what its 2 billion users can post on the site are revealed for the first time in a Guardian investigation that will fuel the global debate about the role and ethics of the social media giant.
The Guardian has seen more than 100 internal training manuals, spreadsheets and flowcharts that give unprecedented insight into the blueprints Facebook has used to moderate issues such as violence, hate speech, terrorism, pornography, racism and self-harm.
They illustrate difficulties faced by executives scrabbling to react to new challenges such as revenge porn and the challenges for moderators, who say they are overwhelmed by the volume of work, which means they often have just 10 seconds to make a decision.
Facebook cannot keep control of its content, said one source. It has grown too big, too quickly.
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/may/21/revealed-facebook-internal-rulebook-sex-terrorism-violence
This looks like a Guardian exclusive. There are several articles on their front page.
www.theguardian.com
Why leak this?
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,448 posts)Last edited Sun May 21, 2017, 02:26 PM - Edit history (1)
So people who use Facebook know more about the policies they're supposed to adhere to. So they understand that those policies are enforced by people who are overworked and underpaid. So users can put pressure on Facebook to walk the walk and not just talk the talk. Transparency, in this case, is good.
mercuryblues
(14,543 posts)underpaid and overworked.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,448 posts)That's what I get for day drinking, I guess.
KatyMan
(4,211 posts)Day drinking doesn't count.
Control-Z
(15,682 posts)Until right now I thought it was Saturday. Damn.
KatyMan
(4,211 posts)You get an extra weekend day. It's a rule. Take tomorrow off.
Control-Z
(15,682 posts)So I might need a note for tomorrow. OK?
Thanks!
PSPS
(13,617 posts)There is no "free speech" or "first amendment" when it comes to a private company and its publications or products. Facebook is under no obligation whatsoever to allow anything at all, let alone what's discussed in the article. It makes me laugh when they feel they have to "decide" that "snap the bitch's neck" is really OK and will be "allowed." Try to place an ad in the New York Times with such a phrase and see if they'll publish it.
Facebook is in it for nothing more than the money. The more people that use it, the more money they get for the advertising they run. Like most self-entitled under-taxed billionaires, Zuckerberg has no social conscience, no decorum, no sense of decency.