Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Claims NYT Expose Has 'A Number of Inaccuracies' (variety.com)
Earlier today, Facebook issued a response to a New York Times report on the social media company's handling of the many scandals it faced last year, including Russian interference and the Cambridge Analytica scandal. "There are a number of inaccuracies in the story," Facebook said in a point-by-point blog post, including that the company was aware of Russian meddling on the social platform months before taking any action. Variety reports: Facebook said it has "acknowledged publicly on many occasions" that "we were too slow to spot Russian interference on Facebook, as well as other misuse." But Facebook denied the allegation in the Times report that the company knew about Russian activity as early as the spring of 2016 and had failed to actively investigate it. The company cited CEO Mark Zuckerberg's congressional testimony from April 2018, in which he said Facebook detected threats related to Russia only in the weeks leading up to the U.S. election in November 2016. When it identified fake accounts that were used to furnish stolen information to journalists, "we shut these accounts down for violating our policies," Zuckerberg testified.
Meanwhile, Facebook in October 2017 enlisted Washington, D.C.-area PR firm Definers Public Affairs, founded by Republican political strategists, as part of its crisis response to dealing with the Russia fallout. Among other activities, Definers launched a campaign linking Facebook critics to liberal billionaire George Soros, a common tactic used by anti-Semitic alt-right groups. At the same time, Facebook lobbied the Anti-Defamation League to portray other critics of the company as anti-Semitic, per the Times report. On Thursday, Facebook said it terminated its contract with Definers on Nov. 14 after the Times story was published. Facebook acknowledged that Definers "did encourage members of the press to look into the funding"of Freedom From Facebook, an anti-Facebook organization that has called for the company's breakup. "The intention [of the Definers' efforts] was to demonstrate that it was not simply a spontaneous grassroots campaign, as it claimed, but supported by a well-known critic of our company. To suggest that this was an anti-Semitic attack is reprehensible and untrue," Facebook said.
Meanwhile, Facebook in October 2017 enlisted Washington, D.C.-area PR firm Definers Public Affairs, founded by Republican political strategists, as part of its crisis response to dealing with the Russia fallout. Among other activities, Definers launched a campaign linking Facebook critics to liberal billionaire George Soros, a common tactic used by anti-Semitic alt-right groups. At the same time, Facebook lobbied the Anti-Defamation League to portray other critics of the company as anti-Semitic, per the Times report. On Thursday, Facebook said it terminated its contract with Definers on Nov. 14 after the Times story was published. Facebook acknowledged that Definers "did encourage members of the press to look into the funding"of Freedom From Facebook, an anti-Facebook organization that has called for the company's breakup. "The intention [of the Definers' efforts] was to demonstrate that it was not simply a spontaneous grassroots campaign, as it claimed, but supported by a well-known critic of our company. To suggest that this was an anti-Semitic attack is reprehensible and untrue," Facebook said.
Where do you get that Soros isn't Jewish ? It's not like being a southern baptist and you can walk in, take a special shower and be a baptist. He's Jewish (not that it matters), whether he actively practices the religion is irrelevant.
Or is this some tri-level conspiracy theory bullshit where after decades of attacking him for being some Jewish Rothschild mastermind he's now 'not even Jewish'.
Someone is supposed to profit, but it's not clear exactly how.
Well forget about the memes. I am sure Facebook is deciding the public needs to be protected from the New York Times.
The point is the disgusting deflection the Left always does to demonize people who disagree. Soros is a full-throated globalist so nationalism suddenly becomes white-nationalism, etc. There is no doubt that George Soros has funneled billions of dollars into his various organizations who then route that money to fund radical Leftist causes and their media orgs. It isn't up for debate. Instead of discussing merits they quickly label anyone who disagrees with the most vile slurs they can think of over and over again, creating a narrative.
It's everything the Left has accused the Koch brothers of doing for years times 1000.
Facebook accusing anyone of disseminating inaccurate information is so epic in its hypocrisy that
I don't think the English language can possibly describe it.
POT meet KETTLE
Right. They should have said "super sleezy scum" instead. More accurate that way.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
They claimed that "there are a number of inaccuracies in the story".
Zero is a number.
Jewish isn't a race, it's a religion.
Educate yourself.
I find it tickles my perverse sense of humor to see lefties trading pot-shots with other lefties.
{^_-}
He's a NAZI collaborator
That's what's called a "lie". We both know it isn't true. What I want to know is why your worldview is so centred on making up lies about people you feel you should hate? Does it make hating them easier?
SJW n. One who posts facts.
That's what's called in his own words
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
He had no sense of guilt as well.
Oh, so you're one of those people who think he was a 9 year-old SS officer?
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
No I am one of those people that doesn't give him a pass for helping the NAZIs rob people who were being sent to death camps.
I also am one of those people who don't "No I don't feel any guilt, because it would have happened anyway" as an excuse from anyone.
Where do you get that Soros isn't Jewish ? It's not like being a southern baptist and you can walk in, take a special shower and be a baptist. He's Jewish (not that it matters), whether he actively practices the religion is irrelevant.
Or is this some tri-level conspiracy theory bullshit where after decades of attacking him for being some Jewish Rothschild mastermind he's now 'not even Jewish'.
He's a rich leftist (we used to call them "limousine liberals") who uses his money to cause problems around the world.
I neither knew nor cared that he is in some sense Jewish; nor probably do most people who criticize him know or care.
I cba to click on a youtube link especially when I'm 99% sure you're linking to that interview that I've already seen. It's covered far better here than I could ever cover it:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-ch...
So we still both know you're full of shit. It's funny that you realise you're suposed to need a good reason to hate someone. What's not funy is your desparate attempt at a post-hoc justificaton of your hate. You are prepared to stretch facts to far, far beyond breaking point in order to justify to yourself that your hatred is, well, justified.
Here's a free clue: if you need those mental gymnastics then no your hate isn't justified. You should probably example your motivations but I know you won't.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Your source that the child Soros robbed people going to death camps? Infowars?
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Paraphrasing Mandy Rice-Davis's immortal words, as relevant today as they were at the time.
It's both.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
I don't know about the Jewish part, and I don't care; that's irrelevant to me, I'm not remotely anti-Semitic. Behavior and action is what matters, not race or creed.
But that little line exposes Variety as yet another left leaning publication who wants to paint anyone anti-Soros as a deplorable. Not only the so-called "alt-right" criticizes Soros, many standard conservatives do as well, simply for the fact that he is the funding behind many globalist and leftist agendas. I'll bet Variety would not dream of labeling those claiming a reverse equivalent of the Koch Bros, even though they fund both left and right agendas: whatever makes them money.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
I give him a pass for not doing that. He didn't rob people going to death camps. He didn't rob Jews in general. He didn't rob anyone.
He saw the possessions of one Jewish family confiscated, he was brought along, on precisely one occasion, with people who were doing that. The Jewish family hadn't been sent to a concentration camp, they'd fled Germany.
Soros was 9 years old.
Soros didn't have the ability to stop what was going on, and as a matter of fact had to play the role of "Godson" to a German bureaucrat or else face death. But the interview you've read is usually quoted out of context and with the key points ignored. Here's the key quote, from the interview that's always being quoted out of context:
Witnesses are not culpable just because they're witnesses.
Now, I don't necessarily blame people for misreading that interview, he prattles on about his role in the markets, and how if he didn't do something, someone else would, but he's trying to draw a distinction between that and what happened when he was young, when he was trying to survive a regime that wanted to murder him and his family. He's always clearly blindsided by the questioning, which is probably why it's so garbled. There are known facts about what happened, such as this happening one time, and one time only, that are far from clear in what Soros says.
Soros is, for whatever reason, the right's bogeyman and virtually everything written about him needs to be taken with several truckloads of salt as a result. There's more misinformation about him than there is left wing misinformation about the Koch brothers, probably because Soros has made more enemies and is worse at the politics than the Kochs are. Soros was unfortunate enough to be brought up in a country whose leaders, and to a certain extent population, wanted to murder him. It's easy to manipulate any story of survival into a story of immorality. Be careful what you believe.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
I am sorry but linking to snopes which has well known problems is b.s. and you know it. It isn't a fact checking site as a propaganda site. What else do you call it when the owner hires a prostitute as a fact checker who is also his mistress.
I bet you're #BelieveHer when it comes to Kavanaugh but don't give a shit about Keith Ellison.
60 minutes, I linked to the video clip already
I give him a pass for not doing that. He didn't rob people going to death camps. He didn't rob Jews in general. He didn't rob anyone.
That's the spin he started to put out after he realized how bad what he said was.
Their hands are in enough things at this point that even if facebook itself stops seeing use (long time away) they'll still live a long long time in other ways.
Need any dad jokes?
"cause problems around the world"? That characterization seems enormously, and unhelpfully, opinionated. Regardless of whether you agree with the causes he supports, or not, simple fairness requires you to acknowledge that he is not just spending his money in an attempt to "cause problems".
If you disagree with him, please be honest about that disagreement. Don't assign intent that is clearly not there in an effort to demonize. That is just dishonest.
I am sorry but linking to snopes which has well known problems is b.s. and you know it.
Problems in that it has a strong reality bias. I guess that is a bias if you truly live in a post truth age.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
I am sorry but linking to snopes which has well known problems is b.s. and you know it.
Problems in that it has a strong reality bias. I guess that is a bias if you truly live in a post truth age.
Yeah reality bias. Having a fact checker running for office, and another who is both a prostitute and works while drugged is a reality bias.