Facebook censoring anti-Obama memes

[SassyLady]

Do you think Facebook was justified in removing this?

(source: Breitbart.com)

Facebook reportedly took down an image, or a meme, posted by the Special Operations Speaks PAC (SOS) that was critical of President Barack Obama’s handling of the terrorist attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi. You may have actually seen it before it was taken down — it had earned roughly 24,000 “likes.”

The meme, which can be seen below, shows both Obama and deceased al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden with the following message: “Obama called the SEALs and THEY got bin Laden. When the SEALs called Obama, THEY GOT DENIED.”

The message is based on reports that indicate CIA operatives in Benghazi were told to “stand down” rather than help after Americans on the ground in Libya attempted to call out for help. Reports also suggest that the White House situation room had access to a live feed of the chaos at the U.S. compound as well as real-time email updates from within State Department.

Breitbart.com’s Awr Hawkins reportedly spoke with Larry Ward, president of Political Media, Inc., the company responsible for the SOS Facebook account.

“We created and posted this meme on Saturday after news broke that Obama had known and denied SEALs the backup they requested,” Ward told Breitbart.com.

He continued: “Once the meme was up it garnered 30,000 shares, approx. 24,000 likes, and was read by hundreds of thousands of people — all within 24 hrs. On Sunday, I went into the SOS Facebook page to post something else and found a warning from Facebook that we had violated Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities with our meme. So I copied the warning, put it on the meme as as caption, and re-posted the meme to the Facebook page.”

The re-posted meme was removed within 8 hours before Facebook suspended the SOS PAC’s account for 24 hours.

Is this a violation of free speech or did SOS violate Facebook policy?

[Noir]

Should they of removed it? IMO no.

Is this a violation of free speech? Again no, unless Facebook became a state organisation while i was asleep.

[007]

The powers behind Facebook clearly support Obama.
Harvard types who never worked a day in their lives tend to support Obama.
lets be honest, money made easy( Hollywood etc) has little value.
People making easy money can afford Obama policies.
Those of us who work, in industries that contribute to the economy rarely can afford these punitive measures.

[Noir]

The powers behind Facebook clearly support Obama.
Harvard types who never worked a day in their lives tend to support Obama.
lets be honest, money made easy( Hollywood etc) has little value.
People making easy money can afford Obama policies.
Those of us who work, in industries that contribute to the economy rarely can afford these punitive measures.

Zuckerburg made his money so easy, that you decided it would of been too easy a path for you to take, which is why you're not a billionaire, right?

In any case, who cares who 'the powers that be' at facebook support, they're a private company.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Do you think Facebook was justified in removing this?

No, it was not justified and yes it was a violation of free speech but likely is not actionable.
I think it was a very bad move on the part of Facebook and Romney supporters by the millions should let Facebook know it!-Tyr

[Noir]

No, it was not justified and yes it was a violation of free speech but likely is not actionable.
I think it was a very bad move on the part of Facebook and Romney supporters by the millions should let Facebook know it!-Tyr

*Private Company*
You dont have a right to free speech so there's nothing to violate. Just like if the admin or mods deleted a post on here.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

*Private Company*
You dont have a right to free speech so there's nothing to violate. Just like if the admin or mods deleted a post on here.

READ MY POST AGAIN, SEE THAT --"NOT ACTIONABLE" in my post. I ALREADY COVERED THAT.
Its not actionable but it is a deliberate infringement on free speech. Even worse its a deliberate infringement of political free speech. Facebook needs to have a few million Romney supporters apply some pressure by cancelling accounts. Maybe the liberal punks would wake up. -Tyr

[Anton Chigurh]

*Private Company*
You dont have a right to free speech so there's nothing to violate. Just like if the admin or mods deleted a post on here.

It actually went public, it's a publicly held company.

But it still ain't the G, you're right.

[gabosaurus]

Facebook has also removed anti-Romney and anti-religious content it has deemed to be "in poor taste." This is part of Facebook's terms of service, which every user agrees to.

[007]

Zuckerburg made his money so easy, that you decided it would of been too easy a path for you to take, which is why you're not a billionaire, right?

In any case, who cares who 'the powers that be' at facebook support, they're a private company.

His was a stroke of luck.
what I have can has been earned in blood, sweat and danger.
greedy liberals hate those who work for their money.
They value out of touch Hollywood Multi millionaires, silver spoon socialists, drains on the economy such as bums on welfare and schoolteachers( unionised and on government payroll, meritorious teachers are despised).

The punitive taxation is always directed at the worker!

[Anton Chigurh]

All they've really accomplished is further proliferation of this than it already had or was going to have.

Gabby: How exactly was this a violation of FB's ToS? Last time I checked, factual information wasn't against any ToS.

[aboutime]

Everybody should pay attention to this story.

Facebook is a private company with stockholders. Facebook can censor anyone, or any story they want, and it does not have anything to do with FIRST Amendment rights, or freedom of speech.

NOW...Pay attention. THIS FORUM called DebatePolicy is jimnyc's FORUM, and he has the sole decision making power to Determine WHAT ANY OF US SAY HERE.

If you dislike it. Go somewhere else. Just like those SEAL'S must do...even though I agree with them, and I also tried to post something in support of OBAMA'S 'BENGHAZI' LIES....which Facebook removed.

[Anton Chigurh]

Everybody should pay attention to this story.

Facebook is a private company with stockholders. Facebook can censor anyone, or any story they want, and it does not have anything to do with FIRST Amendment rights, or freedom of speech.

NOW...Pay attention. THIS FORUM called DebatePolicy is jimnyc's FORUM, and he has the sole decision making power to Determine WHAT ANY OF US SAY HERE.

If you dislike it. Go somewhere else. Just like those SEAL'S must do...even though I agree with them, and I also tried to post something in support of OBAMA'S 'BENGHAZI' LIES....which Facebook removed.

That's right, there's NO freedom of speech on private property. First Amendment addresses state action, not private.

[jimnyc]

I guess they feel, as a private company, that if they get rid of dumb pictures all over that somehow this will change the outcome of the election? Dumb pictures are posted by both sides and won't change a damn thing anyway. They can get rid of the entire word "romney" and everything associated with it and it won't make a bit of difference. Do people really change their minds over Facebook posts?

[Anton Chigurh]

I guess they feel, as a private company, that if they get rid of dumb pictures all over that somehow this will change the outcome of the election? Dumb pictures are posted by both sides and won't change a damn thing anyway. They can get rid of the entire word "romney" and everything associated with it and it won't make a bit of difference. Do people really change their minds over Facebook posts?

Being far lefties, they feel it is their duty to be part of Obama's "truth squad." They're apparently afraid that if they don't defend the indefensible, somebody somewhere will pull their liberal card. It's just mindless reflexiveness. Instinct.