Facebook removed every Bernie Sander's group with significant membership numbers.

Bartholomew · Apr 25, 2016

Here's where I found people talking about it, after noticing that all of my Bernie Sanders groups on Facebook were gone.

They're also apparently blocking certain Sanders images automatically.

I do not believe that this is some intentional action on Facebook's behalf, but maybe, just maybe, vast automated algorithms that allow for instant censorship are a terrible idea. The groups have been slowly trickling back into existence for the past half hour, but you know what? To absolute hell with the machine they've built. They have the money, and the really bad stuff needs reported to the authorities anyway. Facebook (and Youtube, and every other social media platform) needs to decouble themselves from automated censorship and they need to do it yesterday. Maybe, gasp, hire human beings that judge material on a case-by-case basis. That'd be new and strange.

I'd been keeping my comic strip out of politics, but this is beyond motivating, so here, I made a comic.

And you know what? It's completely, 100% open source and free to use forever. Here's a blank version. Don't know how to make word bubbles for a cartoon? Here's some premade word balloons. These are also by me, and open source for you to use. Want it to look good? Here's a professional quality comic font you can use, for free, so long as you use it for free comics. If I had made the font, that would be open source, too.

I've never been so very angry, and had so very few ways to express it.

Rufus Coppertop · Apr 26, 2016

I think it's both sad and criminal that Sanders opponents would resort to something like that and shabby of Facebook to allow it.

Bartholomew said:
Maybe, gasp, hire human beings that judge material on a case-by-case basis. That'd be new and strange.

Indeed. New and strange but at the same time, somehow weirdly, strangely appropriate. It's not as if they can't afford it, after all.

I've never been so very angry, and had so very few ways to express it.

I don't blame you.

Zoombie · Apr 26, 2016

Watching copyright bots run rampant has been pretty infuriating for the past year and some.

Roxxsmom · Apr 26, 2016

I lost faith (and respect) in FB's reporting system when breastfeeding mothers had their accounts suspended because of reports (even though they weren't in violation of any policy), yet domestic violence jokes are kept up.

Yeah, because they don't make enough money to hire humans to judge these things.

Ravioli · Apr 26, 2016

Facebook's "moderating" is awful. Some of you know I've been harassed by so far 19 fake accounts all made by the same person and Facebook has no option against it.
They only recently added animal cruelty to reportable offenses.
And their algorhythm is shit. The most awful things stay online whereas a nipple picture gets a popular page taken down.
They have no system, it's just arbitrary bullshit. I'm desperate for a job, I'd be happy to be deleting, banning, or dismissing reports and users all day. I heard they pay well.

I love this site for sharing and networking, but they are creeping me out. I was viewing a random person's profile and found in their about section, a prompt from Facebook, asking: "Need a break? Learn how to control how much you see from certain people!" (or something like that), and it showed a picture of my ex and made my ex into the whole example of how to tune out a person. 2 weeks ago, he had put me through a horrible breakup and unfriended me. No FB contact since. WTF Facebook.
Or how they show ads pertaining to topics or even just single, out-of-context words, I've posted about on FB, or off-site. I post about my dog being too thin, and get weightloss ads. I'm fat, recovering from a lifetime of self-hate, that shit is traumatic.

They need to back off, but why should they. Power is fun.

raburrell · Apr 26, 2016

Rufus Coppertop said:
I think it's both sad and criminal that Sanders opponents would resort to something like that and shabby of Facebook to allow it.

Indeed. New and strange but at the same time, somehow weirdly, strangely appropriate. It's not as if they can't afford it, after all.

I don't blame you.

The bold seems like a pretty big leap to me. If it was something organized by the campaigns that managed to fool algorithms they don't even know the details of, I'd be impressed, but... Hanlon's razor and all. If whoever they quoted in the article thinks someone at FB intentionally weighed the number of complaints they'd get about Sanders images vs the number they'd get about NO MORE BERNIE, well... I'd suggest they might want to think about that one a little harder.

I'm guessing what happened is that in this point in the campaign, people who aren't Sanders supporters are getting tired of their Sanders-supporting friends evangelism on the subject and are blocking the images. The algorithm saw enough of those that Bernie ended up getting put on the naughty list.

Shorter post: FB algorithms are stupid.

James D. Macdonald · Apr 26, 2016

Back in 2008 I was moderating (by hand!) the comment threads at McClatchy newspapers. On the day of any given primary, just like clockwork, we'd get, nearly simultaneously, a couple hundred brand-new members, from a couple hundred different IPs, who would each post an exactly two-sentence anti-Hillary comment, then vanish.

I would delete the comments (most of them were wildly off topic), ban the IPNs, then wait for the next primary, when the process would repeat.

(Unmoderated, or machine moderated, sites left 'em up.)

There's no reason to think that the folks who were doing that haven't figured out new, different, and better ways to game the various systems.

leifwright · Apr 26, 2016

Roxxsmom said:
I lost faith (and respect) in FB's reporting system when breastfeeding mothers had their accounts suspended because of reports (even though they weren't in violation of any policy), yet domestic violence jokes are kept up.

Yeah, because they don't make enough money to hire humans to judge these things.

My wife was among these.

One of her derelict cousins reported an image of her feeding our son.

darkprincealain · Apr 26, 2016

It's pretty easy to see how Facebook's automated system is handling moderation. Just pick a threat of violence, report it, and see how fast the modbot gets back to you with a, "thank you for reporting this, but we believe it does not violate Facebook's terms" boilerplate message. In my experience, it'll happen to you much more than once, if you report several things. The algorithms don't actually seem to be working.

robeiae · Apr 26, 2016

raburrell said:
I'm guessing what happened is that in this point in the campaign, people who aren't Sanders supporters are getting tired of their Sanders-supporting friends evangelism on the subject and are blocking the images. The algorithm saw enough of those that Bernie ended up getting put on the naughty list.

Seems reasonable. It's also reasonable that some Clinton supporters purposefully took this road, no (reporting/blocking images of Sanders to maybe achieve this end)?

From last week: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-19/pro-bernie-sanders-image-blocked-by-facebook-computers/7337804

I would think Trump page/images would have seen something similar by now. Though I guess it's possible they did and I just missed it.

nighttimer · Apr 26, 2016

robeiae said:
Seems reasonable. It's also reasonable that some Clinton supporters purposefully took this road, no (reporting/blocking images of Sanders to maybe achieve this end)?

It's too early in the morning for this sort of shit-stirring. :rolleyes

raburrell · Apr 26, 2016

robeiae said:
Seems reasonable. It's also reasonable that some Clinton supporters purposefully took this road, no (reporting/blocking images of Sanders to maybe achieve this end)?

From last week: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-19/pro-bernie-sanders-image-blocked-by-facebook-computers/7337804

I would think Trump page/images would have seen something similar by now. Though I guess it's possible they did and I just missed it.

Your link is the same as the OP, I believe, but yeah, I wouldn't doubt it - I'm just not convinced it's some organized campaign 'thing'. It could just as easily be regular people who are tired of seeing Sanders-related content in their feeds and click the 'i don't want to see this' button. FB then forces you to report a reason, and 'offensive' is one of the choices.

Just anecdotally, Sanders has not had a good month with my Clinton-supporting friends - I'm personally at the point where if by some miracle he won the nomination, I'd go back on my earlier plan to support him and I'd write in another choice. He's gone from a guy I didn't agree with, but respected, to someone I don't want to see as president and am starting to dislike personally. I have no idea how representative that opinion shift is of other Clinton voters, but it's certainly something I've seen a lot of discussion about on other sites I visit, so... yeah.

Ravioli · Apr 26, 2016

darkprincealain said:
It's pretty easy to see how Facebook's automated system is handling moderation. Just pick a threat of violence, report it, and see how fast the modbot gets back to you with a, "thank you for reporting this, but we believe it does not violate Facebook's terms" boilerplate message. In my experience, it'll happen to you much more than once, if you report several things. The algorithms don't actually seem to be working.

I heard it's about how often a bit of content is reported. If it hits a certain number, the content is deleted or even reviewed by a person. So if 10 crybabies report a picture of 2 guys kissing, Facebook deletes it while it isn't in violation of any ToS.

This here article is very interesting, though currently offline I suppose as I can't load it:
http://theinternetoffendsme.wordpre...d-facebook-moderation-and-your-petty-reports/

And yes, reports of impending crime should be treated with utmost priority. But there are also non-acute things that need handling because they perpetuate abuse of various kinds.

robeiae · Apr 26, 2016

raburrell said:
Your link is the same as the OP...

Is it? My bad. The story was new on Reddit, where it was noted that this had come up last week. Here's a recent one at Heavy:
http://heavy.com/news/2016/04/berni...-why-hillary-clinton-attack-censorship-which/

So it happened last week, then it happened again yesterday. But the Heavy article notes that it may have just been a bug:

However, newer reports may indicate that a bug or glitch on Facebook also played a role. On Reddit, user imjoshs posted this thread and shared a photo of a message from Aidan King, the digital and social media manager for Bernie Sanders’ campaign. He said that he talked with Aidan King on the ConnectWithBernie slackchat and was told that there was a Facebook bug that closed many Facebook groups, not just Bernie Sanders groups.

Call me crazy, but twice in less than two weeks suggests something other than just a bug.

Amadan · Apr 26, 2016

I think it's slightly more likely that the Sanders-banning was "organic" because Sanders vs. Clinton is an in-fighting thing, meaning a lot of fellow liberals are going to be sending pictures and memes to their in-group, resulting in a lot of Clinton supporters getting fed up with Bernie memes. Whereas how many Trump supporters have tons of liberal friends to whom they are going to send Trump memes? I imagine they got blocked after the first one...

nighttimer · Apr 26, 2016

robeiae said:
Is it? My bad. The story was new on Reddit, where it was noted that this had come up last week. Here's a recent one at Heavy:
http://heavy.com/news/2016/04/berni...-why-hillary-clinton-attack-censorship-which/

So it happened last week, then it happened again yesterday. But the Heavy article notes that it may have just been a bug:

Call me crazy, but twice in less than two weeks suggests something other than just a bug.

Okay. You're crazy.

From the Heavy link:

A number of Bernie Sanders Facebook groups, including some with more than 50,000 members, were removed from Facebook all around the same time on Monday. Facebook user Dorian Gray told Heavy.com that the synchronized attack appeared to take place while Sanders was talking at the Town Hall. It appears that at least some of the reports originated from Clinton supporters in a rival Facebook group, but a Facebook bug may have also been involved.

For groups that had been around for a while and were so popular, their removal was a pretty big deal and could have pointed to a massive, coordinated effort. The groups have already been reinstated. The removed groups included:

Bernie Sanders Activists

Bernie Believers

Bernie Sanders Is My Hero

Bernie or Bust

Bernie Sanders for President

Bernie Sanders – Ideas Welcome

Bernie Sanders Revolutionaries

Bay Area for Bernie

New versions of some of these groups were created, to help combat the removal, such as a new Bernie Believers that is at this link. And other new groups were created to help the supporters still find a place to gather, like Bernie Sanders Reconvenes.

Since the article was first published, all the groups have been brought back online as of late Monday night. Bernie Sanders is My HERO was one of the first to report being reinstated.

Some members of the Sanders Facebook groups, such as Liz Laguaite on Twitter, posted their concerns and wondered if this had any connection to rival political groups, such as a PAC supporting Hillary Clinton that was going to begin targeting posts written by Bernie Sanders supporters and other political groups. But screenshots provided by some members of the Bernie Sanders groups indicated it may have been at least partially the result of a group of trolls who supported rival political parties, working together to spread false reports about the groups.

It's fun to paint scenarios of Hillary Hoes waging cyberwar on Bernie Bros and its particularly a great big giggle for partisans whom aren't supporting either of them but enjoy playing Don King and promote a fight.

These petty scrums are significant only to those directly involved in it. Bernie Sanders should be more concerned about the decision of the voters in the five states holding presidential primaries today than the mischief-making of Facebook trolls and system glitches.

DancingMaenid · Apr 26, 2016

Amadan said:
I think it's slightly more likely that the Sanders-banning was "organic" because Sanders vs. Clinton is an in-fighting thing, meaning a lot of fellow liberals are going to be sending pictures and memes to their in-group, resulting in a lot of Clinton supporters getting fed up with Bernie memes. Whereas how many Trump supporters have tons of liberal friends to whom they are going to send Trump memes? I imagine they got blocked after the first one...

I have a Facebook friend who's pretty closely alligned with me, politically, but who loves to argue with bigoted posts/comments. So pretty regularly, I see annoying posts on my feed because he commented on them.

And yes, I'm thinking of unfollowing him.

Roxxsmom · Apr 26, 2016

raburrell said:
I'm guessing what happened is that in this point in the campaign, people who aren't Sanders supporters are getting tired of their Sanders-supporting friends evangelism on the subject and are blocking the images. The algorithm saw enough of those that Bernie ended up getting put on the naughty list.

Shorter post: FB algorithms are stupid.

That could be, though wouldn't it also affect Trump and Clinton? I'll bet a lot of people are blocking those images too. I expect a lot of people are sick of any and all political memes, regardless of who they support personally. I've certainly gotten tired of my libertarian friends posting stuff about Trump and general comments about how stupid liberals are (and how we should just pee like it's 1999, which is a meme that's popped up lately and is presumably a stab at transgender people), though I haven't blocked them. Actually, I didn't know it was possible to block posts by subject, just by user (and I don't want to block everything these people send).

StuToYou · Apr 26, 2016

Ravioli said:
This here article is very interesting, though currently offline I suppose as I can't load it:
http://theinternetoffendsme.wordpre...d-facebook-moderation-and-your-petty-reports/

And yes, reports of impending crime should be treated with utmost priority. But there are also non-acute things that need handling because they perpetuate abuse of various kinds.

Great link, thank you for that. an eye-opening, if distressing, piece of info.

I think maybe FB should bring on board semi-voluntary mods or something like that.

Don · Apr 26, 2016

Roxxsmom said:
That could be, though wouldn't it also affect Trump and Clinton? I'll bet a lot of people are blocking those images too. I expect a lot of people are sick of any and all political memes, regardless of who they support personally. I've certainly gotten tired of my libertarian friends posting stuff about Trump and general comments about how stupid liberals are (and how we should just pee like it's 1999, which is a meme that's popped up lately and is presumably a stab at transgender people), though I haven't blocked them. Actually, I didn't know it was possible to block posts by subject, just by user (and I don't want to block everything these people send).

You sure do have a lot of weird libertarian friends. I don't know a single libertarian who supports Trump (most aren't a fan of politicians in general) or makes fun of transgender issues. Sounds like social conservative LINOs to me.

Amadan · Apr 26, 2016

No true libertarians?

Dennis E. Taylor · Apr 26, 2016

Roxxsmom said:
That could be, though wouldn't it also affect Trump and Clinton? I'll bet a lot of people are blocking those images too. I expect a lot of people are sick of any and all political memes, regardless of who they support personally. I've certainly gotten tired of my libertarian friends posting stuff about Trump and general comments about how stupid liberals are (and how we should just pee like it's 1999, which is a meme that's popped up lately and is presumably a stab at transgender people), though I haven't blocked them. Actually, I didn't know it was possible to block posts by subject, just by user (and I don't want to block everything these people send).

Wait, why would libertarians be taking stabs at transgenders? Isn't libertarianism the ultimate laissez-faire?

Bartholomew · Apr 26, 2016

nighttimer said:
These petty scrums are significant only to those directly involved in it. Bernie Sanders should be more concerned about the decision of the voters in the five states holding presidential primaries today than the mischief-making of Facebook trolls and system glitches.

Maybe you're underestimating how important the various campaigns consider social media. We already know that Hillary's campaign has been paying for "social media specialists" to go to social media and stir shit, including going to Trump social media, pretend to be Bernie people, and try to manipulate brigades. Why is a coordinated reporting scheme so hard for you to believe? It's not like this has been a polite primary.

CassandraW · Apr 26, 2016

Roxxsmom said:
I've certainly gotten tired of my libertarian friends posting stuff about Trump and general comments about how stupid liberals are (and how we should just pee like it's 1999, which is a meme that's popped up lately and is presumably a stab at transgender people), though I haven't blocked them. Actually, I didn't know it was possible to block posts by subject, just by user (and I don't want to block everything these people send).

Don said:
You sure do have a lot of weird libertarian friends. I don't know a single libertarian who supports Trump (most aren't a fan of politicians in general) or makes fun of transgender issues. Sounds like social conservative LINOs to me.

I'm with Don -- that seems quite odd. Trump is in favor of all kinds of things -- like eviscerating the 1st amendment, for example -- that are diametrically opposed to libertarian views.

Don · Apr 26, 2016

Amadan said:
No true libertarians?

Angry Guy said:
Wait, why would libertarians be taking stabs at transgenders? Isn't libertarianism the ultimate laissez-faire?

This.

If someone claimed to be a liberal who opposed gun control, raising the minimum wage, and gay marriage, and claimed climate change was a hoax, I'd question their claim of credentials, and anyone else would too. There's never a true example of group characteristics, but any astute political observer is capable of applying the smut definition. You may not be able to define it, but you know it when you see it. Most people would immediately dismiss the self-definition of liberal for the person I described, or an inverse description of a conservatlve, but let anybody spew any group of unrelated positions and if they claim the libertarian title, they receive it without a second thought. Where's the analytical thought in that? It's no harder to recognize a libertarian than it is a liberal or conservative.

Facebook removed every Bernie Sander's group with significant membership numbers.

Comic guy

Dragon of the Multiverse

Beastly Fido

Crazy Cat Lady

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Your Genial Uncle

Mired in the miry mire.

Touch and go

No Gods No Masters