Well known US TV presenterJohn Stossel has problems with the new Facebook censors:
You may recall a similar occurrence earlier in the year, when a group called Friends of Science were also awarded a “Misleading” tag by Facebook, again purely based on fake advice from the same Climate Feedback group who have attempted to censor Stossel.
And FoS’ offence? Simply to repost an article by the Volunteer Firefighters which pointed out that the major factor in why Victoria’s bushfires at the time were so bad was poor management of national parks and the failure to reduce hazardous fuel loads and clear vegetation. Yes, you read it right – the firefighters, who know all about the realities on the ground, were deemed by a climate scientist not to know what they were talking about.
As FOS had reposted the firefighters article via my website, they were advised by Facebook that…
View original post 194 more words
Climate Collections 
Who censors the Censors? That is the question. IMO censoring algorithms should be classified in terms of their intent and transparency. There should be many of them for readers to choose. This freedom to choose being a right. However it remains: Who classifies these algorithms? Will reader assessment responses be enough to provide a means by which an algorithm can be chosen with confidence? We are in a bit of a circle here methinks.
LikeLike