Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Former Facebook Employees Claim Website Snuffed Conservative News

Former Facebook Employees Claim Website Snuffed Conservative News

More evidence shows Facebook discriminates against conservative news.

Former Facebook employees have told Gizmodo that the company regularly told them to stamp out conservative news even if it trended on the website.

From Gizmodo:

Several former Facebook “news curators,” as they were known internally, also told Gizmodo that they were instructed to artificially “inject” selected stories into the trending news module, even if they weren’t popular enough to warrant inclusion—or in some cases weren’t trending at all. The former curators, all of whom worked as contractors, also said they were directed not to include news about Facebook itself in the trending module.

In other words, Facebook’s news section operates like a traditional newsroom, reflecting the biases of its workers and the institutional imperatives of the corporation. Imposing human editorial values onto the lists of topics an algorithm spits out is by no means a bad thing—but it is in stark contrast to the company’s claims that the trending module simply lists “topics that have recently become popular on Facebook.”

“Depending on who was on shift, things would be blacklisted or trending,” stated the former employee, who identifies as a conservative. “I’d come on shift and I’d discover that CPAC or Mitt Romney or Glenn Beck or popular conservative topics wouldn’t be trending because either the curator didn’t recognize the news topic or it was like they had a bias against Ted Cruz.”

Notes from the curator showed Facebook shut down these six stories:

former IRS official Lois Lerner, who was accused by Republicans of inappropriately scrutinizing conservative groups; Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker; popular conservative news aggregator the Drudge Report; Chris Kyle, the former Navy SEAL who was murdered in 2013; and former Fox News contributor Steven Crowder.

They even found that Facebook did not include popular conservative sites like Breitbart or Washington Examiner unless the New York Times or CNN also reported the story.

Gizmodo could not find “evidence that Facebook management mandated or was even aware of any political bias at work.” They do not know if the website treated liberal news the same way. Other employees denied the practice occurred.

However, the former employee said the bosses received pressure to trend Black Lives Matter. The hashtag #BlackLivesMatter began on Facebook.

“Facebook got a lot of pressure about not having a trending topic for Black Lives Matter,” explained the former curator. “They realized it was a problem, and they boosted it in the ordering. They gave it preference over other topics. When we injected it, everyone started saying, ‘Yeah, now I’m seeing it as number one’.”

Facebook hired journalists as contractors to help run their news section in January 2014. Those in charge pushed the journalists to the “basement of the company’s New York office.”

“It was degrading as a human being,” described one former curator. “We weren’t treated as individuals. We were treated in this robot way.”

Another former curator said the company kept them in that room for two-and-a-half months.

“It was clear that Zuckerberg could squash the project at any moment,” said the journalist.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Any the Sun rose again today. No surprise here.

casualobserver | May 9, 2016 at 11:00 am

I am not sure why “we” are expecting different behavior from Facebook and Twitter. Both want to replace traditional media, and Facebook is putting the most resources into that. No doubt, the model is more Drudge Report than NYT. But when you look at the top of the organizations, libertarian or classical liberals they are NOT. Especially the head of Twitter is a hard core SJW type. Leadership at both seem to be more in the mold of William Randolph Hearst using modern technology that the original founders with the same.

    MarkSmith in reply to casualobserver. | May 9, 2016 at 11:23 am

    I think talk radio is in for a change too. Levin lost me this round and I am going to stop listening to him since he sounds like a whiny baby. One of the reasons I stop watching Fox after hurricane Katrina is their whining.

    I need good hard facts and a strong history background. I get more out of the blogs than any other source. On the entertainment side of things, I recommend Chris Plante at WMAL, 105.9. Several years ago they tried to replace Chris Plante with Joe Scarbough.

      Ragspierre in reply to MarkSmith. | May 9, 2016 at 11:50 am

      http://hotair.com/archives/2016/05/09/mark-levin-hits-trump-the-globalist-on-trade-policy-contradictions/

      I’m better than the average bear on history, economics, and Constitutional government, and I learn stuff from Levin constantly.

      I you aren’t…well…

        MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | May 9, 2016 at 1:23 pm

        Took a look at it. Interesting. Comments are even more so against Levin.

        I like the line:

        “The fact that Trump’s political rhetoric runs directly contrary to his own globalist actions as a very successful and wealthy businessman requires a better explanation than he has given thus far. ”

        Levin forgets that is is politics and he does not have to do anything except win.

        I clicked on the Hamilton link and was surprise at how weak it was. I have studied Hamilton pretty deep. Lets follow that up with the Buckley Rule

        Well, if we look at Hillary and Trump and say this is like Adams or Jefferson, it does not compare. It was Jefferson and Burr. Second, when looking at Hillary and Trump, the case could be made that Trump is the “losing Goldwater” candidate, but Obama has not experienced the fate of JFK, thus there is no halo effect.

        As for foreign trade, you can tell me the sun is shining in a rain storm, but what I see is rain. Reagan has some of the most depressing anemic entry level college graduate salaries that I experienced directly and they did not get better until Clinton. I give more credit to congress on the economic war front that the President. I actually think Newt did a pretty good job of steering things in the right direction and playing the political game.

        It is kinda hard to follow that under Bush 1 we had Black Monday, the largest stock market percent drop ever and under Bush 2 we had again another financial crisis in 2008. Yea, Trump is no Reagan and is not a “true conservative, but Levin in most cases reaffirms what I had researched out before. He is off the rails right now using weak arguments to make his point, Trump is not a conservative. I will take Chaney and Sessions endorsement over an over paid talk show host who pushes his books.

          Ragspierre in reply to MarkSmith. | May 9, 2016 at 1:42 pm

          This is a true T-rumpian word salad pile of shit.

          “Levin forgets that is is politics and he does not have to do anything except win.”

          So, you were supportive of Obama and his policies? Because “I won”…

        MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | May 9, 2016 at 2:27 pm

        Too funny. Did I hurt the poor baby little Levin lover’s feeling. I bet you don’t even listen to the guy or you feel like a fool for buying his books. If you want true conservationism watch a movie call Arguing The World with Irving Krystal. The Neo-con lives!

        Classic Rags comment:

        “you aren’t…well…”

        and

        This is a true T-rumpian word salad pile of shit.

        “Levin forgets that is is politics and he does not have to do anything except win.”

        So, you were supportive of Obama and his policies? Because “I won”…

        I sure hope your head does not explode.

        Where was Obama in that discussion. We were talking about your post about hot air and that is the best you can do?

        For those of us who lived though Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama and failed Dole, Romney and McCain runs you don’t have much ground to talk. GOP continues to disappoint and fail. Hey, maybe a win here with Trump.

        I same supporting Trump because I am sick of fake conservatives and RINO’s.

        Oh, that is right, you want to vote for Hillary. Something tells me you did not even like Cruz and don’t believe in his conservative values. Keep trolling Rags.

        An now for a little humor:

        http://blog.dilbert.com/post/143944074406/a-few-observations-on-clinton-trump-persuasion

        MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | May 9, 2016 at 2:29 pm

        Too funny. Did I hurt the poor baby little Levin lover’s feeling. I bet you don’t even listen to the guy or you feel like a fool for buying his books. If you want true conservationism watch a movie call Arguing The World with Irving Krystal. The Neo-con lives!

        Classic Rags comment:

        “you aren’t…well…”

        and

        This is a true T-rumpian word salad pile of shit.

        “Levin forgets that is is politics and he does not have to do anything except win.”

        So, you were supportive of Obama and his policies? Because “I won”…

        I sure hope your head does not explode.

        Where was Obama in that discussion. We were talking about your post about hot air and that is the best you can do?

        For those of us who lived though Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama and failed Dole, Romney and McCain runs you don’t have much ground to talk. GOP continues to disappoint and fail. Hey, maybe a win here with Trump.

        I am supporting Trump because I am sick of fake conservatives and RINO’s.

        Oh, that is right, you want to vote for Hillary. Something tells me you did not even like Cruz and don’t believe in his conservative values. Keep trolling Rags.

        An now for a little humor:

        http://blog.dilbert.com/post/143944074406/a-few-observations-on-clinton-trump-persuasion

    Ragspierre in reply to casualobserver. | May 9, 2016 at 2:00 pm
      MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | May 9, 2016 at 2:41 pm

      Lets see Cruz’s debt plan — 20 T +

      Article I Section 7 : All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

      Who is running that is not part of this? Can’t do any worst. Oh, that’s right “I did not exhale” Johnson.

      MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | May 9, 2016 at 2:42 pm

      Lets see Cruz’s debt plan — 20 T +

      Article I Section 7 : All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

      Who is running that is not part of this? Can’t do any worst. Oh, that’s right “I did not exhale” Johnson.

        MarkSmith in reply to MarkSmith. | May 9, 2016 at 2:58 pm

        Sorry about the dups. I new at posting. For you true conservatives Irving and Buckley is who I tend to align towards. Kristol’s Neo-con and Buckley’s conservatism

        Buckley and Kristol, in their ideas and personal styles, remind us of the variety and contradictions that give strength and broad appeal to American conservatism. Buckley was the father of modern conservatism, but Kristol its godfather. Buckley gave birth to a movement, but Kristol guided it into maturity and showed it how to win. Buckley was born to conservatism; Kristol fought through count …

        Ragspierre in reply to MarkSmith. | May 9, 2016 at 3:24 pm

        You puuuuurrrr T-rump sucking mow-ron…!!!

        Buckley spat on T-trump, as he would spit on him today.

        Look. It. Up. Stupid.

          MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | May 10, 2016 at 12:34 am

          Man, such a brilliant mind. Soon your head will cave in because that pea will dry up. So what was Buckley position of GW?

          The comment about Kristol and Buckley was intended to address true conservatism and how you lack any ability to think outside the box. Your so focused on anti-Trump that you can’t see the forest. In fact, you can’t even see the trees. I think you are just focused on your favorite knot hole. Buckley came in the picture because of one of your posts that tried to talk about the Buckley Rule.

          The Buckley rule holds that conservatives should support “the rightwardmost viable candidate.” It’s a fine rule for conservatives to apply to races for Congress where the victor’s main role will be to vote on legislation that conservatives either favor or disfavor.

          Who is the right most viable candidate right now? You can’t make your case without showing how much of a narrow mind fool you are.

Conservative sites, like Powerline Blog only contribute to this by requiring Facebook in order to log in and comment.

Hey…. I have a great idea… lets support the other side. The side that would ban our opinions from the internet if they could. The side that would put us in jail if we question global climate change. The side that would use the power of the IRS to suppress our views.

And then lets see what our readers think about that (be sure you have a Facebook account to log in and comment on this great idea).

    snopercod in reply to Anchovy. | May 9, 2016 at 2:07 pm

    Not that anybody cares but I quit reading Powerline four years ago when Mirengoff started in on Sarah Palin.

    Paul in reply to Anchovy. | May 9, 2016 at 5:05 pm

    And don’t doubt for a second that they’ll share your data… your friends, your posts, your ‘likes’ and more for use by the progs in their psycho-analytics initiatives.

1. Thank you LI for NOT connecting your comment section to FB accounts.

2. Thank you LI for posting this story. I sensed this was probable as Twitter has been caught on a million times.

The question is… what are conservatives going to do about it?

    Paul in reply to Andy. | May 9, 2016 at 4:59 pm

    Stop wasting your time on Facebook, that’s what you do about it. Delete / deactivate your account. Suggest to all of your conservative friends to do the same. Go back to ‘old school’ forms of communication such as email lists, listservs and GASP! the telephone.

Anyone needing to snuff out the opinions of others does so because their own opinions are weak. Libs can’t win without suppression and bullying. Their ideas have no merits so they have to be implemented by force.

I have been Googling and can’t find it:
Someone (maybe HonestReporting?) ran two almost identical facebook pages – one anti-Palestenian, and one anti-Israel, with almost identical content. They then complained about both.
My recollection is that Facebook quickly removed the anti-Palestinian page but left the anti-Israel one up because they saw no problem with it.
Anyone remember it? a link would be great.

    genes in reply to openeyes. | May 10, 2016 at 12:27 am

    Don’t know about that, but a Anti-Islamist group posted a video showing what Hamas was doing and it got taken down. Their source was a pro-Hamas page where the same video remained up.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend