After major conservative voices from around the globe castigated Facebook for its decision to declare all content by ZeroHedge against its community standards, the website quietly reversed its decision and unbanned ZeroHedge from the platform.
Last weekend ZeroHedge was summarily banned from being posted to Facebook for unspecified violations of Facebook’s community standards. According to the publication, this came as a surprise to them considering they do not even maintain an official Facebook page for the website.
The story was covered by major conservative outlets, including Big League Politics, leading prominent conservatives including Donald Trump Jr., Nigel Farage, Paul Joseph Watson, and many others to speak out publicly about the apparent censorship by the Big Tech Giant.
Late Tuesday, Facebook then reversed its ban in what ZeroHedge calls “a strange 24 hours.”
And then on Tuesday morning, everything had suddenly returned to normal, and whether due to the unexpectedly widespread support we received, or because Facebook had made a sincere error, the ban was reversed.
While Facebook has yet to contact us directly, they did comment with a Facebook spokesman saying that “This was a mistake with our automation to detect spam and we worked to fix it yesterday.” He added that “we use a combination of human review and automation to enforce our policies around spam and in this case, our automation incorrectly blocked this link. As soon as we identified the issue, we worked quickly to fix it.”
We still have no insight into which article(s) Facebook decided was sufficiently “spammy” to block everyone’s access to our content, or on what basis Facebook’s “automation and human review” had made the decision to quarantine our small website from the rest of Facebook’s 2.3 billion monthly users.
This is far from the first time Facebook has backed away from censorship after major backlash.
Just two weeks ago, former Breitbart London editor-in-chief Raheem Kassam had his Facebook ban reversed after similar backlash from Trump Jr., Big League Politics, and other major conservatives.
Former editor-in-chief of Breitbart London Raheem Kassam’s Facebook account has been restored following pressure from the conservative community.
“Following this intervention from [Donald Trump Jr.] and others, Facebook has now reinstated my account. Thank you to Don Jr. and all the others who got so involved and ahead on this story. I’ve no doubt you frightened Facebook into acting,” Kassam said on Twitter.
Bypass Tech Censorship!
Facebook, Twitter and Google are actively restricting conservative content through biased algorithms. Silicon Valley doesn't want you to read our articles. Bypass the censorship, sign up for our newsletter now!
Banished Journalist Laura Loomer’s $1.5 Billion Lawsuit Against Tech Giants Will Be Heard in Court
Loomer will have her day in court.
Banished journalist and Florida U.S. House candidate Laura Loomer’s lawsuit against Big Tech will be heard in the court of law following an order in the D.C. Circuit on Thursday.
Loomer is accusing tech giants such as Google, Apple, Facebook and Twitter of conspiring to suppress conservative voices on their platforms. The lawsuit is challenging these monolithic corporations for allegedly violating antitrust law as well as the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.
Her lawsuit had been previously tossed out by U.S. District Judge Trever N. McFadden, a Trump appointee to the bench, who stated that “while selective censorship of the kind alleged by the plaintiffs may be antithetical to the American tradition of freedom of speech, it is not actionable under the First Amendment unless perpetrated by a state actor.” However, Loomer was able to use a recent court ruling to resurrect her lawsuit despite the initial setback.
Loomer’s legal team, led by the right-wing political interest group Freedom Watch, used the precedent of Packingham v. North Carolina, a ruling which determined that it was unconstitutional to ban sex offenders from social media. The case essentially set the precedent that social media is a 1st Amendment right.
“Many of the principles set forth by the Supreme Court in Packingham lead to what appellants believe is the natural progression of the law to hold that social media companies are liable for First Amendment violations, given the progression of technology and its infiltration into the daily lives of nearly every single person,” Loomer’s team said in their final brief presented to the court.
Loomer points to Twitter banning her from the platform at the end of 2018 after she said that Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) adheres to a religion in which “women are abused” and “forced to wear the hijab.” She was similarly banned from Instagram for her assertion that Islam is “a cancer on humanity,” and Facebook, which owns Instagram, quickly followed suit and banned her even though the offending post was not made on that platform.
Loomer still cannot get her accounts restored despite the fact that she is running for the U.S. House in Florida’s 21st Congressional District, which could be considered a form of electoral interference.
Through her legal fight against the tech giants, Loomer is forcing them to reveal that they are no longer neutral platforms:
The tech behemoth Facebook has admitted that it is a publisher while defending its arbitrary censorship of banished journalist Laura Loomer, according to court documents.
Facebook banned Loomer’s account from their platform during a purge of popular conservative voices that happened in May. Others targeted by the purge included Milo Yiannopoulos, Alex Jones and Paul Joseph Watson. Loomer is striking back with a lawsuit that is unearthing some interesting revelations about the social media monolith.
“Under well-established law, neither Facebook nor any other publisher can be liable for failing to publish someone else’s message,” Facebook’s attorneys wrote.
Facebook actually has the audacity to claim that their 1st Amendment rights are being violated by Loomer’s lawsuit, in a total contorting of reality. They have filed a motion to dismiss the case.
“She claims Facebook labeled her as a ‘dangerous’ person who promotes hate – yet, the First Amendment has long protected such statements because they are opinions that are not capable of being proven true or false,” Facebook’s attorneys claim in their dismissal motion.
Right now, Facebook is protected under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act from being held liable for the content published on their platform. This special exemption worked fine when the social network engaged in relative neutrality, but those days are no more as Big Tech is at war with conservative and pro-Trump voices.
Loomer hopes to have her ability to communicate fully restored and to make Big Tech pay for infringing on her basic rights.
Trending on BLP
Big League Wellness3 days ago
Dr. Anthony Fauci Plotted ‘Global Vaccine Action Plan’ with Bill Gates Before Pushing COVID Panic and Doubts About Hydroxychloroquine Treatments
Big League Economics4 days ago
This Wall Street Firm Has Quietly Gained Control Over the Financial Sector During Coronavirus Panic
News3 days ago
GLOBALISM: Bush Foundation Ships 2 Million Masks to China Despite Increasing Shortages in America
News3 days ago
The Wuhan Virus Takes a Bite Out of a Bronx Zoo Tiger
News3 days ago
A Broken Clock is Right Twice a Day: Charlie Kirk Calls for Moratorium on All Visas During Wuhan Virus Pandemic
News3 days ago
British Politicians Believe that the Wuhan Virus Pandemic Might Have Come from a Leak at a Chinese Laboratory
Big League Wellness3 days ago
New York Storefronts Boarded Up as Burglaries Rise 75%
Border Security3 days ago
Smugglers Posing as Border Wall Construction Crew Arrested After Border Patrol Shootout