Facebook bans Holocaust denial amid rapid rise in “deceptive” content

[TheCount]

Facebook today is, once again, theoretically ramping up enforcement against hate speech, this time with a new policy prohibiting Holocaust denial on the platform.

The change is due to a "well-documented rise in anti-Semitism globally," Facebook executive Monika Bickert wrote in a corporate blog post today.

The policy is a complete 180 for Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who in a 2018 interview specifically described Holocaust denial as the kind of "deeply offensive" speech he nonetheless felt should be permitted on the platform. The next day, amid blowback, he "clarified" his position:

Our goal with fake news is not to prevent anyone from saying something untrue—but to stop fake news and misinformation spreading across our services. If something is spreading and is rated false by fact checkers, it would lose the vast majority of its distribution in News Feed. And of course if a post crossed line into advocating for violence or hate against a particular group, it would be removed. These issues are very challenging but I believe that often the best way to fight offensive bad speech is with good speech.

Zuckerberg said in a Facebook post today that his own thinking "has evolved" amid the growth in anti-Semitic violence in recent years. "Drawing the right lines between what is and isn't acceptable speech isn't straightforward," he added, "but with the current state of the world, I believe this is the right balance."

The ban on Holocaust denial is just the latest in a huge suite of policy changes and proposals Facebook has made in the past two weeks explicitly related to hate speech, misinformation, or "influence operations."

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...ptive-content/

[r3volution 3.0]

...in before someone posts a link to a site "proving" that the holocaust didn't happen.

[jmdrake]

...in before someone posts a link to a site "proving" that the holocaust didn't happen.

In before someone misses the point that "hate speech" bans today equals total censorship tomorrow. Oops...too late. (Both for people missing the point and for the total censorship). I agree with Facebook's private property right to do that, just like RPF has a private property right to censor. But it's still concerning. Not sure what to do about it though. Building an alternative platform is easy. Getting people in mass to leave places like Facebook for the alternative is not.

[John-G]

...in before someone posts a link to a site "proving" that the holocaust didn't happen.

Ofc, that can be used for anything you want to promote. lemme show you how it works

X Member: Makes a post promoting communism as a successful economic system
Rev: In before someone makes a post about how communism is a failed economic system

Congratulations, you predicted that someone in the know will counter your assertion and you without any attempt to debunk thinks somehow you had the upper hand by mere prediction.

No worries m8, links debunking the holocaust are being taken down everyday. In the near future, there wouldn't be any links available to challenge your superstition about the holocaust.



There you go. I don't expect you to reply to this with any meaningful reply but if you are serious. I can give you some links to reach and watch and after reading and watching, you too will understand why our overlords wants to ban this particular set of belief.

Btw, ever wonder why there are no laws banning slavery denial? or Native American genocide or any other type of widely publicized genocide?

[Todd]

This is one area that shouldn't surprise anyone. This has been going on in Europe since before I was even born.

[jmdrake]

Btw, ever wonder why there are no laws banning slavery denial? or Native American genocide or any other type of widely publicized genocide?

Probably because A) I have never seen anyone going around saying slavery didn't happen or that the Trail of Tears didn't happen (seriously as in never) and B) both of those episodes were centered in the U.S. and we have (and thankfully still have) a first amendment. So Holocaust denial is perfectly legal in the U.S. and if there were slavery deniers...well they would be allowed to. Why would some other country that doesn't have freedom of speech (say Germany?) want to pass a law about not denying what happened in the U.S.?

[John-G]

Probably because A) I have never seen anyone going around saying slavery didn't happen or that the Trail of Tears didn't happen (seriously as in never) and B) both of those episodes were centered in the U.S. and we have (and thankfully still have) a first amendment. So Holocaust denial is perfectly legal in the U.S. and if there were slavery deniers...well they would be allowed to. Why would some other country that doesn't have freedom of speech (say Germany?) want to pass a law about not denying what happened in the U.S.?

Actually, because its centered in the US and the first amendment is even more reason why you should see people denying slavery or the native American genocide. But the problem is that if slavery denial ever happened, those people will be laughed at the same way flat earth people are laughed at. There wouldn't be any need for big tech or govt to censor them. You wouldn't need laws passed to reinforce the belief in the school systems (which is currently done in the US which is why many Americans to this day believe this idea without question).

I think slavery, Native American genocide, flat earth, moon landing, fluoride etc denial will now be added to the list to shift focus off the holocaust. But make no mistake, it was highly highly exaggerated. The camps, were real, the suffering were real, the anti semetism was real but the gas chambers and the approx 6 million deaths are not real.

[jmdrake]

Actually, because its centered in the US and the first amendment is even more reason why you should see people denying slavery or the native American genocide. But the problem is that if slavery denial ever happened, those people will be laughed at the same way flat earth people are laughed at. There wouldn't be any need for big tech or govt to censor them. You wouldn't need laws passed to reinforce the belief in the school systems (which is currently done in the US which is why many Americans to this day believe this idea without question).

I think slavery, Native American genocide, flat earth, moon landing, fluoride etc denial will now be added to the list to shift focus off the holocaust. But make no mistake, it was highly highly exaggerated. The camps, were real, the suffering were real, the anti semetism was real but the gas chambers and the approx 6 million deaths are not real.

Ummm.....holocaust deniers do get laughed at. But also you are ignoring an important context. The south was proud of its slave owning heritage. And it wasn't until the late 20th century that the "Civil war was not about slavery and the south wasn't racist" argument came to be. The U.S. used to be proud of its treatment of the Native Americans. The typical "Cowboys and Indians" / John Wayne movie was about the brave white settlers defending themselves from the utterly savage Indians. Dances With Wolves was the first mainstream pro Indian movie I saw. (Well..there was Billy Jack too, but that was about the treatment of Indians in the modern day.) And I remember when Dances With Wolves came out, NPR movie reviewer Bob Mandelo attacked it for being too pro Indian. (It didn't matter that some of the Natives in that movie were your typical brutal savages. The fact that the ones Kevin Costner allied himself with were decent was enough for Mr. Mandelo to declare "Some Indians played soccer with human skulls.") Anyway, my point is that it's hard to deny a history of which you were once proud. Contrast that with Nazi Germany. At the end of WW II, who was going around being proud of anything the Nazis accomplished? That said, Americans did use hypothermia research to save lives. But that research came from human experiments on concentration camp victims. So....do you think that was made up? Oh...that's right. You think the camps were real but that the 6 million deaths number isn't. You may be right. You may be wrong. I don't think it makes a difference. But again, no analogy to Native American genocide or slavery. I think if slavery had just happened there might be deniers. We live in a world now when everything gets denied by someone. Again, there's the whole "The civil war wasn't about slavery" deniers. Those people get laughed at too. But we live in a country with a first amendment so they can say what they want.

[Sammy]

To learn who rules over you,simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize

Voltaire

[Anti Globalist]

The only denial I see when it comes to the Holocaust is that it was physically impossible to kill 6 million Jews.

[jmdrake]

The only denial I see when it comes to the Holocaust is that it was physically impossible to kill 6 million Jews.

Yeah. And I don't get why people think that when Rwandan militias killed 800,000 in 100 days armed mostly with machetes.

https://www.history.com/topics/africa/rwandan-genocide

At that rate, 6 million could have been killed in a little over 2 years. The holocaust lasted 4. Maybe it wasn't 6 million, but that's not physically impossible.

[John-G]

Ummm.....holocaust deniers do get laughed at. But also you are ignoring an important context. The south was proud of its slave owning heritage. And it wasn't until the late 20th century that the "Civil war was not about slavery and the south wasn't racist" argument came to be. The U.S. used to be proud of its treatment of the Native Americans. The typical "Cowboys and Indians" / John Wayne movie was about the brave white settlers defending themselves from the utterly savage Indians. Dances With Wolves was the first mainstream pro Indian movie I saw. (Well..there was Billy Jack too, but that was about the treatment of Indians in the modern day.) And I remember when Dances With Wolves came out, NPR movie reviewer Bob Mandelo attacked it for being too pro Indian. (It didn't matter that some of the Natives in that movie were your typical brutal savages. The fact that the ones Kevin Costner allied himself with were decent was enough for Mr. Mandelo to declare "Some Indians played soccer with human skulls.") Anyway, my point is that it's hard to deny a history of which you were once proud. Contrast that with Nazi Germany. At the end of WW II, who was going around being proud of anything the Nazis accomplished? That said, Americans did use hypothermia research to save lives. But that research came from human experiments on concentration camp victims. So....do you think that was made up? Oh...that's right. You think the camps were real but that the 6 million deaths number isn't. You may be right. You may be wrong. I don't think it makes a difference. But again, no analogy to Native American genocide or slavery. I think if slavery had just happened there might be deniers. We live in a world now when everything gets denied by someone. Again, there's the whole "The civil war wasn't about slavery" deniers. Those people get laughed at too. But we live in a country with a first amendment so they can say what they want.

Technically at the end, the southerners weren't proud of slavery and Native American genocide because at the end of a defeat nobody is proud of their actions that potential was a cause of said defeat. So if you believe the holocaust scholars, there should be loads of evidence showing the Nazi celebrating and promoting their genocide of the European jews.

Also, people don't just laugh at holocaust revisionists, they try to silence them, jail them, shadow ban them and when all fails they try to ignore them. Laughter is what they use to smugly avoid debating them. Have you ever seen "One third of a holocaust"? the last days of a big lie? Denier? these are scholarly works that no holocaust pusher can touch.

[John-G]

Yeah. And I don't get why people think that when Rwandan militias killed 800,000 in 100 days armed mostly with machetes.

https://www.history.com/topics/africa/rwandan-genocide

At that rate, 6 million could have been killed in a little over 2 years. The holocaust lasted 4. Maybe it wasn't 6 million, but that's not physically impossible.

The difference between the 2 is that with Rwanda, In one, you had literally millions of people going after a smaller group of people vs the other where you have a few camp workers killing millions of people in a planned out way called gas chambers. The people in Rwanda were killed with all sorts of crude methods, in a very large area greater than 6-7 death camps. There was no need to dig mass graves or build gas chambers or crematoriums to dispose off the bodies. If you have ever watched "one third of the holocaust", you will understand why the numbers are virtually impossible for Auschwitz–Birkenau death camp.

Gassing people and going out on the street with a matchete to kill someone are completely different ways of killing a man. One big difference is open air vs in room and controlled environment.

[jmdrake]

Technically at the end, the southerners weren't proud of slavery and Native American genocide because at the end of a defeat nobody is proud of their actions that potential was a cause of said defeat. So if you believe the holocaust scholars, there should be loads of evidence showing the Nazi celebrating and promoting their genocide of the European jews.

1) How were the people who carried out Native American genocide "defeated?" And Native American genocide wasn't a "southern" thing. Yes Andrew Jackson did the trail of tears and he was from the South. He also threatened to hang southern secessionists.

2) Have you not heard of the movie "Birth Of A Nation?" It was hailed by President Woodrow Wilson as "the greatest movie ever." The heroes in that movie are klansman who "set things right" in the post reconstruction South. Seems like a group of people that was quite proud of the institution of slavery. And "Gone With The Wind" romanticized slavery. So did the Shirley Temple movie "The Littlest Rebel." By contrast there has been no movie industry in Germany romanticizing the Nazi period.

3) Did you see any statues of Nazi leaders in post world war 2 Germany that you still see of confederate leaders? No? That should be a clue to you as to why your argument is not sound. Nothing about Nazi Germany is celebrated in Germany. Nothing. Not even the parts that everybody agrees on. The Nazis had some brilliant generals and created some advanced war technology for the time. There's far more information and interest about that in the U.S. than in Germany. Hell, when U.S. video game companies sell games to Germany that have to self censor the games to block out the Nazi insignia. That doesn't mean the Nazi insignia never existed.

Also, people don't just laugh at holocaust revisionists, they try to silence them, jail them, shadow ban them and when all fails they try to ignore them. Laughter is what they use to smugly avoid debating them. Have you ever seen "One third of a holocaust"? the last days of a big lie? Denier? these are scholarly works that no holocaust pusher can touch.

In the U.S. they laugh at them. Jailing people for offensive views is still against the constitution. Sadly that may change, but right now that's what happens. Civil war revisionists run into the same treatment. They can say what they want legally. Some laugh at them but not as much as holocaust deniers. And yes, some have been silenced. What is happening in the U.S. now with the push to remove confederate statues never had to happen in Germany because, for one thing, the U.S. and Soviet occupiers of Germany never allowed them to go up in the first place. By the time Germany was given home rule, nobody who supported the Nazis was willing to say "Hey! Let's put up a Herman Goering statute!" We have more buildings named after Nazis in the U.S. than in Germany. (The Von Braun Civic Center in Huntsville Alabama is named for the Nazi who invented the V2 rocket...and also helped the U.S. space program.)

[jmdrake]

The difference between the 2 is that with Rwanda, In one, you had literally millions of people going after a smaller group of people vs the other where you have a few camp workers killing millions of people in a planned out way called gas chambers. The people in Rwanda were killed with all sorts of crude methods, in a very large area greater than 6-7 death camps. There was no need to dig mass graves or build gas chambers or crematoriums to dispose off the bodies. If you have ever watched "one third of the holocaust", you will understand why the numbers are virtually impossible for Auschwitz–Birkenau death camp.

Gassing people and going out on the street with a matchete to kill someone are completely different ways of killing a man. One big difference is open air vs in room and controlled environment.

Jews were killed during the Holocaust multiple ways. Some never even made it to the camps. Some died on the way. Some were killed. When the Germans invaded Russia and came across Jews they didn't put them on a train back to Auswitch. They killed them on the front. That's a lot more efficient.

Here's an image of a Nazi firing squad.

[jmdrake]

To learn who rules over you,simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize

Voltaire

QFT. @John-G instead simply looking at the 6 million number, have you considered the question of why efforts to stop Hitler through an economic boycott prior to WW II were thwarted?

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...stopped-hitler

[Anti Federalist]

Pretty much a moot issue if you ask me.

All the "deniers" have to do is wait, and allow the naturally occurring idiocy of short attention spanned AmeriKunts to flourish.

A majority of these $#@! kids today, don't even know what it is, let alone whether the numbers are accurate or not.

Holocaust study: Two-thirds of millennials don’t know what Auschwitz is

[John-G]

Jews were killed during the Holocaust multiple ways. Some never even made it to the camps. Some died on the way. Some were killed. When the Germans invaded Russia and came across Jews they didn't put them on a train back to Auswitch. They killed them on the front. That's a lot more efficient.

Here's an image of a Nazi firing squad.

I have never actually said the Nazi did not kill any jews but if you look at the death numbers that make up the 6 million, 90% plus came from the main death camps like Auschwitz–Birkenau where the method of killing was Zycon B. Now if you told me that millions of Germans went on a killing spree, killing any jew they found up to 6 million, that would be a much more believable story that the gas chamber killings.

That is really the point I was trying to make

[John-G]

In the U.S. they laugh at them. Jailing people for offensive views is still against the constitution. Sadly that may change, but right now that's what happens. Civil war revisionists run into the same treatment. They can say what they want legally. Some laugh at them but not as much as holocaust deniers. And yes, some have been silenced. What is happening in the U.S. now with the push to remove confederate statues never had to happen in Germany because, for one thing, the U.S. and Soviet occupiers of Germany never allowed them to go up in the first place. By the time Germany was given home rule, nobody who supported the Nazis was willing to say "Hey! Let's put up a Herman Goering statute!" We have more buildings named after Nazis in the U.S. than in Germany. (The Von Braun Civic Center in Huntsville Alabama is named for the Nazi who invented the V2 rocket...and also helped the U.S. space program.)

I have to disagree with you on this, they may laugh at them but that is after they have thrown the kitchen sink at them. Boycotts, blackballing, loss of jobs, etc before they start laughing. The pushers of the holocaust take this seriously because the vast majority of them believe the story and anyone trying to minimize what they believe to be genocide is not something they play around with.

Unlike some hoax, the people who believe in this story are not fraud, they are true believers which is why they rarely(if ever) laugh at deniers.

[jmdrake]

Pretty much a moot issue if you ask me.

All the "deniers" have to do is wait, and allow the naturally occurring idiocy of short attention spanned AmeriKunts to flourish.

A majority of these $#@! kids today, don't even know what it is, let alone whether the numbers are accurate or not.

Holocaust study: Two-thirds of millennials don’t know what Auschwitz is

The milenial generation is defined as 1981 - 1996. The last really well done holocaust movie was Schindler's List which came out in 1993. So....most millennials never saw it. I will admit I knew nothing of the Holocaust until the mini series titled, you guessed it, "The Holocaust" came out in 1978. Those who run Hollywood will most certainly do a reboot movie / miniseries if they feel it has faded to far from public consciousness.

[jmdrake]

I have never actually said the Nazi did not kill any jews but if you look at the death numbers that make up the 6 million, 90% plus came from the main death camps like Auschwitz–Birkenau where the method of killing was Zycon B. Now if you told me that millions of Germans went on a killing spree, killing any jew they found up to 6 million, that would be a much more believable story that the gas chamber killings.

That is really the point I was trying to make

What about Operation Reinhard in Poland where carbon monoxide was used?

https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/1/eaau7292

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Reinhard

[jmdrake]

I have to disagree with you on this, they may laugh at them but that is after they have thrown the kitchen sink at them. Boycotts, blackballing, loss of jobs, etc before they start laughing. The pushers of the holocaust take this seriously because the vast majority of them believe the story and anyone trying to minimize what they believe to be genocide is not something they play around with.

Unlike some hoax, the people who believe in this story are not fraud, they are true believers which is why they rarely(if ever) laugh at deniers.

Again, you are missing the basic problem with your apples vs eggplants comparison. There is, and has been, a large constituency of people who support the confederacy. There's a long history of supporting the "cowboys" over the "Indians." Who in large number supports the Nazis?

[John-G]

What about Operation Reinhard in Poland where carbon monoxide was used?

https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/1/eaau7292

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Reinhard

That is impossible. You mean to tell me that you believe that Germany in the middle of an intensive war was busy killing Jewish victims at the rate of 14700 per day and they were able to sustain it for 100 days? no way you can dispose of that many bodies in 100 days. Even you cannot believe that horse$#@!, do understand that some of the people are liars that would make up anything to smear the Nazis.

Sorry but I do not believe those numbers.

[John-G]

Again, you are missing the basic problem with your apples vs eggplants comparison. There is, and has been, a large constituency of people who support the confederacy. There's a long history of supporting the "cowboys" over the "Indians." Who in large number supports the Nazis?

I did not argue that paragraph, that wasn't my strongest point so I dropped it. I am now arguing that denies are not just laughed at, they are taken seriously by the pushers and all and every legal attempt to censor and destroy these people's lives are employed.

[AngryCanadian]

Will this stop the neo nazis in Europe? doubtful.

[Danke]

[Slave Mentality]

Will this stop the neo nazis in Europe? doubtful.

You can not regulate, ban, imprison, or kill an idea and we shouldn't try to. Good ideas flourish and bad ideas eventually die in the light of logic. Trying to control ideas isn't just impossible tyranny, but only prolongs the life of bad ideas because the regulators keep them from being exposed.

Burning books has been happening since there were books. Humans trying to control the actions and thoughts of other humans has been happening since there were humans. That's what this is - let us decide what you think.

[TheCount]

Probably because A) I have never seen anyone going around saying slavery didn't happen or that the Trail of Tears didn't happen (seriously as in never)

Some of RPF's 2015 posters engaged in slavery denial... though less "slavery didn't happen" and more "actually slavery was great and everyone liked it, including the slaves, who were well treated" and so on


The same arguments made toward the holocaust would be considered holocaust denial.

[AngryCanadian]

You can not regulate, ban, imprison, or kill an idea and we shouldn't try to. Good ideas flourish and bad ideas eventually die in the light of logic. Trying to control ideas isn't just impossible tyranny, but only prolongs the life of bad ideas because the regulators keep them from being exposed.

Burning books has been happening since there were books. Humans trying to control the actions and thoughts of other humans has been happening since there were humans. That's what this is - let us decide what you think.

You are correct though i am never in this action what FB is doing by putting or regulating or banning for expressing a opinion or ideas, could you imagine if they started banning users for expressing their views on Hollow Earth or such similar things? what democrats are trying to do by banning Qanon is idiotic and shows they are touch with things in reality in America.

[r3volution 3.0]

In before someone misses the point that "hate speech" bans today equals total censorship tomorrow. Oops...too late. (Both for people missing the point and for the total censorship). I agree with Facebook's private property right to do that, just like RPF has a private property right to censor. But it's still concerning. Not sure what to do about it though. Building an alternative platform is easy. Getting people in mass to leave places like Facebook for the alternative is not.

I don't find the censoring of national socialist thought by a private outfit which I'm free to not use concerning at all.

Likewise if they want to ban communist posting, etc.

But but but, what if they ban libertarian posting?!

Then I'd oppose that.

But but but, isn't that hypocritical?!

It would only be hypocritical if I were in favor of free speech in principle on private platforms, which I'm not.

So, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

P.S. And before someone suggests that holocaust denial isn't a matter of promoting national socialism, I recognize that there may be a few people interested in the topic from a purely historical point of view, as there might be people, not keen on communism, who find that common historical estimates of Stalin's death toll are exaggerated, but the reality, in my experience, is that people who argue that the holocaust, or holodomor, etc, weren't so bad are trying to resuscitate the image of those regimes because they share their ideology. In other words, this censorship has very little if anything to do with suppressing truth-seeking; it's more about suppressing propaganda campaigns by groups, which, presumably, we don't like here on RPF.