[PJ] Despite famously swearing that they took a long, hard look at themselves and found no hint of bias, Zuckerberg and Co. still have a hard time hiding their agenda:The 'Why' is quite obvious.
To be fair, Facebook wasn't the only major social media platform that seemed to be trying to provide cover for the Democrats yesterday.
Facebook has at least quickly, albeit rather cryptically, owned up to it.
Its chief security officer, Alex Stamos, tweeted that whatever was blocking WikiLeaks had been "fixed." That was it. The Next Web's Nate Swanner remains unsatisfied:
But we don’t know why Facebook took issue with the links. It’s possible its algorithm incorrectly identified them as malicious, but it’s another negative mark on the company’s record nonetheless. WikiLeaks is a known entity, not some torrent dumping ground.
Obviously they were 'Making Our World More Open.'
Previously, Facebook was discovered to have removed a Live video of Philando Castille dying, and posts of the Bastille Day aftermath were scrubbed from the newswire. Its news bar has also come under fire for being biased.
Facebook can call the issues disparate, but they’re not -- not to users. At some point, the ignorance and blind claims of ’damn that algorithm’ have to end. If Facebook wants us to turn to it for news and treat it seriously, then it has to be much more open.
The WikiLeaks link issue has reportedly been fixed, which is great -- but also not really the point. The fact links to the archive was blocked at all suggests there’s a very tight reign on what’s allowed on Facebook across the board, and that’s a problem.
'Tight reign on what's allowed' is it ?