A BBC investigation found 100 "sexualised images of children" on Facebook. Auntie Beeb reported the images to Facebook, who found over 80% of them to be "not in breach of their guidelines" - despite one of them including a still from a child abuse video with a label requesting viewers "share child pornography."
The twist is that when the BBC followed up on this failure, Facebook reported the BBC to the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre for "distributing images of child exploitation".
How can Facebook expect users to help them police their content when reporting abuse gets the users accused of the abuses they are reporting?
Alternate articles:
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @08:48PM (1 child)
I'll bite, but you'll have to elaborate. I'm afraid I'm not making the connection as readily this time. Where is the violently imposed monopoly here?
I'm thinking chemtrails and the weather war might be more applicable to this topic, since chemtrails are the only thing I can figure that would make people think using Facebook is a good idea (or think that Facebook has any intention or history of using its "report this post" feature in any objective way). Water fluoridation conspiracies might work as well.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @09:13PM
You've obviously never had to fight off a group of heavily armed TV Licensing [tvlicensing.co.uk] thugs. If we had a free market in television, disasters like this unfounded attack on Facebook wouldn't happen.