Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Facebook unblocks California GOP congressional candidate’s campaign ad

Facebook unblocks California GOP congressional candidate’s campaign ad

If she wins CA-16, and she could, Elizabeth Heng should send Facebook a big “Thank You” note.

Should Republican congressional candidate Elizabeth Heng win California’s 16th district seat this November, I might suggest she send the social justice brigade in charge of monitoring Facebook videos a big “Thank You.”

The social media giant’s video team blocked one of her ads, but changed their mind once they received backlash.

Elizabeth Heng, who is running against Democratic incumbent Jim Costa, posted an inspiring campaign ad that began with chilling images from the Cambodian genocide in the 1970s while telling about her parents’ survival. The theme of her campaign: “Great things can come from great adversity.”

It seems that the message may have been too powerful for Team Facebook.

Heng’s campaign said Facebook “revoked approval to advertise” the video last week. According to a screenshot posted to Twitter, Facebook said it was not approved because it does not adhere to its advertising policies.

“We don’t allow ads that contain shocking, disrespectful or sensational content, including ads that depict violence or threats of violence,” the message from Facebook read.

The ad is compelling, which might explain a bit of the motivation behind Facebook’s decision:

However, it appears that Facebook officials have seen the light, after news of Heng’s blocked video went viral.

Facebook lifted Tuesday its block on Republican Elizabeth Heng’s campaign ad, but the California congressional candidate said the company still owes her a public apology.

“I’m deeply disappointed that Facebook would not give me a public apology for targeting a conservative candidate for Congress,” she said in a statement. “It took them 5 days and an immense amount of pressure before they ‘realized’ that they deliberately blocked my history and my story.”

…After a deluge of criticism on the right, a Facebook spokesperson said Tuesday that the ad had been cleared for distribution.

“Upon further review, it is clear the video contains historical imagery relevant to the candidate’s story,” said Facebook in an email to the Washington Times. “We have since approved the ad and it is now running on Facebook.”

The chances for Heng’s victory in the 16th District are good, which could be another potential motivator for the progressive social media overlords. Fellow California Victor David Hanson explains in Powerline:

In California’s June 2018 primary Heng came within a few thousand votes of beating the well-funded 7-term incumbent congressman Jim Costa in a district that went heavily for Hillary Clinton in 2016. The 16th congressional district is considered a safe blue seat in the usual midterm election surveys. So her stunning near primary win against overwhelming odds should have been a national wake-up story for lots of reasons.

…Elizabeth Heng is a sort of un-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Like her, she is a minority, female, young and charismatic and a first-time congressional candidate. But after that all comparisons end—and end dramatically in Heng’s favor.

Elizabeth grew up in a working-class neighborhood of Fresno, was a product of the Fresno public schools, and then went directly to Stanford where she became student body president. She later earned a MBA from Yale—all the while working on the Hill.

Because of the Facebook stunt, Heng’s Central Valley campaign has now attracted national attention. For those of you who wonder if California can turn itself around, this is a golden opportunity to help us do so: Donate to Heng’s campaign.

Think about how much satisfaction you could get by turning this “safe” blue seat in the bluest state in the union a lovely shade of red, knowing that you helped!

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

What is interesting is the liberals were so against the Citizen United ruling, but censorship of the republicans by major tech companies goes right to the heart of their disagreement. Where is their out cry?

    Matt_SE in reply to MarkSmith. | August 8, 2018 at 1:02 pm

    I wonder sometimes if these aren’t tantrums against Dems losing specific fights. Not only do recent tech bannings rub up against Citizens United, but they border on Net Neutrality too.

    But then I remember that progs aren’t that subtle.

I hope this was a Freudian slip:

“Democratic incumbent Jim Acosta

…an inspiring campaign ad that began with chilling images from the Cambodian genocide in the 1970s…

I doubt the young SJWs at Facebooger were even aware of that bit of ancient history.

And were triggered by having to see images of it.

more BS – Barbara Streisand effect

who would have known about her except for the attempt to silence her

I’m a libertarian at heart, but I think their ought to be some consequences when the FBs and Twitters of the world censor people for no legitimate reason.

I’m all for the 1st Amendment, but somehow these huge forces need to be reined in; they unfairly upset the balance of power.

I don’t know what the solution is, but it seems to me that the bifurcation in our society is growing larger by the day, and these big social media platforms are doing nothing to stop it … and everything to perpetuate it.

    It is not a First Amendment issue. It is a Free Speech issue.

    Matt_SE in reply to tiger66. | August 8, 2018 at 1:08 pm

    I look at it this way:

    Jim Crow was run in large part by private companies. Remember the Woolworth’s “colored” counters? Yet strangely, nobody seems to have a problem with government intervention in that case, because the reason for persecution was obvious (it was literally skin deep).

    Now, other civil rights are being infringed upon (and yes, “free speech” is a societal precept, even if it isn’t specifically covered by the 1st amendment because government isn’t the antagonist here).

    I see no problem in using government to smack this down. In fact, protecting citizens’ rights is one of the few legitimate functions of government.

      Old Patzer in reply to Matt_SE. | August 8, 2018 at 2:06 pm

      Are you kidding? The problems from the government interventions of that era are legion and continue to plague us today:

      – Loss of freedom of association
      – Undermining of states’ rights
      – “Protected classes”
      – Government duty to fix social problems
      – Delegitimizing of opposing views
      – Primacy of ends over means
      – Affirmative action; the Great Society

      I see the tech companies as responding in a clumsy and blinkered way to intense pressure to eliminate “bad” messages from their sites. Applying the heavy hand of government won’t make things better.

        Matt_SE in reply to Old Patzer. | August 8, 2018 at 9:18 pm

        I was going to say “We’ll see if you feel the same way when they shut down Legal Insurrection,” but I guess we won’t.

What these left wing giants are doing is akin to Starbucks saying you can only sit in their shops and praise left leaning politics in your political discussions.

What an inspiring story! I’m sorry for everything I ever whined about! I doubt that California can be saved from self-immolation, but Victor Davis Hanson & this young lady do represent a smidgeon of hope. I was happy to contribute.

Why does every donation page always require a phone number? I get enough spam calls already. Even the professor wants my money and my number.

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | August 8, 2018 at 3:15 pm

The InfoWars Bans Aren’t About Alex Jones, They’re About Big Tech’s Control Over What We See

This is about what it means for our society if a few tech companies should be able to decide for everyone what information is available, and what is over the line.
By Holly Scheer

thefederalist.com/2018/08/07/infowars-bans-arent-alex-jones-theyre-big-techs-control-see/

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend