Facebook obediently blocks scientific bloggers and atheists on the complaints of the ignorant majority

Pages allegedly violate “community norms”

In mid-April, Facebook blocked at least six Arabic-language pages for the “violation” of community norms, where atheists from MENA countries gathered (Middle-East and North Africa). One of the victims was the Atheist Alliance community - Middle-East and North Africa (AA-MENA). And it became the only one that dared to challenge the blocking procedure in Facebook. This procedure is subject to manipulation. Dozens of other communities of atheists and scientific bloggers who don’t like the religious or just ignorant majority have suffered from it - and obediently close on Facebook complaints.

"According to the complaints of the workers" ...

A month earlier, in February 2016, the 10 largest Arabic-speaking atheistic groups with a total number of subscribers of about 100,000 people were deactivated. The deactivation mechanism was used in exactly the same way: a powerful campaign with numerous complaints of allegedly “offended” users, which was actually organized by Islamic fundamentalist groups operating on the Internet, the so-called cyber-jihad activists. Generally speaking, the consideration of "workers' complaints" with the obligatory response to them was used in the USSR long before the advent of Facebook. Even then, abuses occurred when “complaints” were initiated by a team.

In such a coordinated campaign, a very large number of people, and possibly automatic scripts, simultaneously file a complaint that a certain page, Facebook group or personal account violates Community Standards , that is, it is offensive. This is exactly what happened with the AA-MENA community.
')
Facebook’s grievance process is vulnerable to such massive appeals. If a large number of people complain about the "offensive" page - according to the rules, this page is deactivated.


The emblem of the Atheist Alliance community of the Middle East and North Africa - one of the atheist communities that Facebook deactivated in April 2016

However, representatives of the AA-MENA community did not give up after blocking and published a petition to Mark Zuckerberg. They wrote that atheists in Arab countries are subject to various harassment and restrictions on freedom of speech. They are not given the right to vote. The Internet is the only way to speak freely. But here too they are being silenced, and Facebook unwittingly helps religious fanatics.

The AA-MENA petition was noticed and supported by atheist like-minded people in Western countries. They managed to draw attention to the problem. Sadly, such public attention had a tragic result: on April 22, 2016, an atheist activist from Yemen, Omar Mohammad Bataweel, was killed . He noted several posts on Facebook, which the fundamentalists considered "criticism of Islam." For his publications and comments on the Internet, he repeatedly received threats from religious fanatics. The investigation into his case remains open and at the moment there are no suspects, which could have been expected.

The AA-MENA community requires Facebook to restore pages that were closed after coordinated complaints from Islamic fundamentalists. AA-MENA also requires Facebook to change the standard procedures for collecting and responding to complaints, including in these procedures at least a basic objective assessment of the content of the pages that are planned to be deactivated for violating “community standards”.

Deactivating science bloggers

Unfortunately, the tactic of mass complaints to suppress dissent is effectively working on Facebook, not only in Arab Islamic countries, but also in the west.

A screaming incident occurred in February 2016 in the USA. As in Russia, in this country, individual pseudo-experts speculate on public delusions and make themselves a career on antiscientific statements. For example, about the dangers of vaccinations. Moreover, in specialized forums (mainly women’s “for mommies” forums), whole communities of fans against vaccinations gather, who do not tolerate any criticism and do not accept any arguments.

The victim of the blocking on Facebook in March 2016 was Professor Allison Hagud , who constantly speaks on the Internet and on television with scientific arguments for vaccines and vaccinations, advocating the development of the health system and, in principle, promoting the scientific way of thinking. For example, she co-authored the book The Best Injection for Your Child: Why Vaccines are Safe and Save Lives .

Allison Hagud - the worst enemy in the community "moms." They insult the scientist in every possible way. So, in February, they spread a caricature of it (shown below). Here the professors are depicted in the green image of the Evil Witch of the West from the book The Amazing Wizard of Oz.



Under the photo-made photograph, the inscription repeats the replica of the character from the film : "I will get to you, my darling, and to your little dog too!" The professor added an explanation from herself that the image was created by someone from the haters on the anti-vaccination forums.

However, Facebook has blocked the Allison Hagud page for 30 days for posting this image! This nonsense, obviously, occurred as a result of users' complaints about the “insulting” image, although whom could it offend? The professor simply showed how her opponents were being bullied.

And here is a screenshot from one of the anti-vaccination forums where activists rejoice at the victory and are going to file additional complaints to Facebook in order to extend the account ban for a longer period.



As the investigation showed, the scientist's account was blocked as a result of the coordinated activities of the activists of the so-called Vaccine Resistance Movement. In addition to submitting mass complaints to Facebook, they harassed Allison Hagud on other fronts:

1. We created an online petition with the collection of signatures to the employer of Professor Hagud with the requirement to apply disciplinary measures.
   
   
2. Constantly sent complaints to the university, where the professor teaches, trying to achieve her dismissal.
   
   
3. Published her private address online.
   
   
4. Emailed her friends.
   
   
5. Created a website solely for the purpose of harassing Allison Hagud.
   
   
6. Constantly sent her threatening messages. Here is one example.
   
   

And this is not counting the traditional methods of harassment - insults on the forums, creating insulting photos and photos, etc.

It is clear that such actions of activists are explained only by one thing: they do not have worthy arguments that oppose the scientific argument of the professor. Surprisingly another: their actions still proved to be effective, and Facebook eventually blocked Allison Hugood's account! That is, these people managed to beat Facebook's complaints system.

This is far from the first time that Facebook’s algorithms and complaints procedures are incorrectly used to silence an opponent. Other scientific bloggers who advocate the use of vaccines and vaccines have been the victims of mass complaints from activists in anti-vaccination forums. The militant position of such activists is known in RuNet, they can be compared with the feminist movement or the opponents of GMOs: just as they do not tolerate any criticism and do not accept scientific arguments. In the west, there are several other antiscientific communities that have the same traits: for example, activists who deny the Holocaust, or revisionists, who believe that historical events were not the same as we are told. They all communicate in a circle of their own kind, which further strengthens their confidence in their own right, and any scientific criticism is perceived very aggressively.

If the denial of the Holocaust does not directly threaten the lives of people, then in the event of denial of the benefits of vaccines, such anti-science directly harms the health of children, so it must be dealt with. This is exactly what Professor Allison Hagood was doing, for which she paid.

The current rules of the “ Community Standards ” on Facebook are quite extensive and allow you to block for a large number of various “violations”. For example, mentioning anyone by name in a disparaging tone is already a reason for blocking. It is not even necessary to mention in a dismissive tone, it is enough that the opponent is offended. If he complains, the account will freeze. The procedure for handling complaints and banning accounts on Facebook remains a mystery to outsiders, but it is clearly subject to manipulation. What opponents use.

Usually, an account is frozen for 30 days, during which the owner has no right to post entries. The victim has no opportunity to appeal (that is, it is not clear where to file it, the procedure is not regulated). In general, it is not clear who Facebook is dealing with such complaints.

The same fans from the “mommies” forums and their henchmen successfully extended the blocking of the scientific bloggers account as soon as the previous ban expired.

It is not entirely clear how to solve this problem. Probably the only way is to encourage Facebook to reconsider the rules for handling complaints and blocking accounts. There must be some way to distinguish between where a reasoned complaint and the victim are, and where there is a coordinated effort to harass the user and specifically to block his account.

On the forums they joke that the best plan to overcome Facebook’s blocking algorithms is massive complaints about the Facebook page itself .