Whistleblower reveals Facebook censorship system created to enter China

midian182

Posts: 11,624   +176
Staff member
A hot potato: Mark Zuckerberg is a vocal proponent of free speech, especially since Donald Trump was re-elected, but it seems the Meta CEO hasn't always been so anti-censorship. There have long been reports that Facebook developed a content suppression tool for the Chinese market. Now, new details about the system have surfaced.

Last April, Sarah Wynn-Williams, a former Facebook global policy director who was fired in 2017, revealed in a complaint filed with the SEC that Facebook sought a foothold in the Chinese social media market. It hoped to achieve this by creating a version of its platform that complied with China's strict censorship laws.

The company formed a team to work on the China-specific version of Facebook, codenamed Project Aldrin, in 2014. Wynn-Williams says (via The Washington Post) that some of the concessions Facebook agreed to with local authorities included hosting Chinese and Hong Kong user data on servers in China, making it easier for the government to access the personal information of these citizens.

It was also proposed that a Chinese private-equity firm be allowed to review content posted by Chinese users, and that hundreds of moderators be hired to remove restricted content.

Wynn-Williams alleged that Facebook built a censorship system that automatically detected and removed restricted terms in 2015. She also claims Facebook was ready to appoint a chief editor who would oversee the content that could appear on Chinese Facebook. They would be able to remove anything not aligned with the CCP's policies and could even shut down the site entirely if the country experienced social unrest.

The whistleblower report claims that Facebook restricted the account of Chinese businessman Guo Wengui in 2017 in the hope of winning favor from Chinese officials. Wengui regularly posted about the alleged corruption within the Chinese government, though Facebook claimed his account was removed because he was sharing "personal information of others without their consent." The report alleges that this action was encouraged by a Chinese internet regulator to prove that Facebook was willing to "address mutual interests."

Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said the company's interest in the Chinese market was "no secret," and that Zuckerberg announced it was moving away from these efforts in 2019.

"This is all pushed by an employee terminated eight years ago for poor performance. We do not operate our services in China today. It is no secret we were once interested in doing so as part of Facebook's effort to connect the world," Stone said. "This was widely reported beginning a decade ago. We ultimately opted not to go through with the ideas we'd explored."

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A post shared by Mark Zuckerberg (@zuck)

In 2019, Zuckerberg, apparently having given up on the prospect of a Chinese version of Facebook, spoke about the importance of freedom of expression while criticizing China's censorship laws in a speech at Georgetown.

In January, Zuckerberg announced that Meta was prioritizing free speech following the recent US elections. This involved the replacement of third-party fact checkers with community notes, removing restrictions on topics such as immigration and gender, and focusing only on high-severity policy violations such as terrorism, child sexual exploitation, drugs, fraud, and scams. Meta is also reinstating civic content, which was removed in 2021 due to political misinformation concerns.

Permalink to story:

 
I find it amusing how everybody points fingers at other people for aiding communist China, while in reality every last of us does. Who of us does not have a single item made in China?
We support it, we let it grow.

China is a place of no morals and no respect to human life. Back in uh 1997, I witnessed Chinese industrial cranes collecting and transporting the remains of Chinese female industrial workers who had died at work. They just didn't care b/c they are Chinese.

I wish I had never been to China.

Imagine a country that shows no respect to their own females, imagine how much they will respect you, a GWEI-LO (Pale Devil).

That's how they call Europeans and they don't care if you come from Yorkshire, Scotland or Greece.
 
Whistleblower ???
These usually disclose secrets, right? The fact everything in China is severely censored is not a secret. Any information in China is either heavily censored or illegal. Everyone knows that without whistleblowers.

Far more concerning is the fact Facebook was heavily censored in the US until very recently. Where are the whistleblowers disclosing how that happened? As a pinnacle of absurdity, Zuckerberg played 'whistleblower' in Joe Rogan's show ...
 
Mark Zuckerberg is a vocal proponent of free speech, especially since Donald Trump was re-elected, but it seems the Meta CEO hasn't always been so anti-censorship.
This is perfectly in line with what Mark Zuckerberg said here: https://www.techspot.com/news/10624...ch-push-facebook-instagram-replaces-fact.html

He even said that Facebook had too much censorship in the United States and elsewhere. Obviously China is a whole different beast, but each political party has information they do not want reported. The US constitution limits what the federal government can do to censor its citizens' speech, whereas China does not.

Even so, the Biden administration also pushed for censorship to match its agenda. And any government would of course would be labeling censored content as misinformation not censorship. When some "misinformation" turns out to be true, it's an indicator of an underlying problem. It could easily have always just been inconvenient. "Truth" can be controlled based on citizens perceptions after all.
Mark Zuckerberg said:
And and this really hit the most extreme, I'd say, during it was during the Biden administration when they were trying to roll out, the vaccine program. And now I'm generally, like, pretty pro rolling out vaccines. I think on balance, the vaccines are more positive than negative. But I think that while they're trying to push that program, they also tried to censor anyone who is basically arguing against it.

And they pushed us super hard, to take down the things that were honestly were true. Right? I mean, they they basically pushed us and and said, you know, anything that, says that vaccines might have side effects, you basically need to take down. And I was just like, we're not gonna do that. Like, we're we're clearly not gonna do that.
[...]
Like, it's like our government is is telling us that we need to censor true things. It's like, this is a disaster. And it's, you know, it's not just the US. Right? I think, you know, a lot of people in the US focus on this as an American phenomenon.
Here he talks about censorship that Facebook had developed originally (just more reasonable policies):
Mark Zuckerberg said:
I think going back to the beginning or like I was saying, I think you you start 1 of these if you care about about giving people a voice. You know, I wasn't too deep on our content policies for, like, the first 10 years of the company. It was just kinda well known across the company that, we were trying to give people the ability to share as much as possible.

And issues would come up, practical issues. Right? So if someone's getting bullied, for example, we deal with that, or we put in place systems to to fight bullying. Right. You know, if someone is saying, hey.

You know, someone's pirating copyrighted content on on the service. Like, okay. We'll build controls to make it so we'll find IP protected content. But it was really in the last 10 years that people started pushing for, like, ideological based censorship. And I think it was 2 main events that really triggered this.

In 2016, there was the election of president Trump, also coincided with, basically, Brexit in the EU and and sort of the fragmentation of the EU. And then, you know, in 2020, there was COVID. And I I think that those were basically these 2 events where, for the first time, we just faced we just faced this massive, massive institutional pressure to, to basically start censoring content on ideological grounds.
 
No one actually buys the free speech stuff.

It's just another bludgeon to throw around in the US culture war.

No one minds if speech they don't agree with is censored, and vice versa. Not a lot of core principles at play here.
Yup. This whistleblower didnt bother talking about this over the last 8 years when anything that offended the sensibilities of the mainstream opinions got banhammered. I'm a free speech absolutist, short of something being outright illegal nothing should be censored. Most of the "freeze peach" "advocates" couldnt care less unless it personally affects them.

The thing about useful *****s is they never realize they are the useful *****, and the party doesnt care what happens to them when they are no longer useful.
 
Looking at how clandestine social media algorithms manipulate the US and EU, I cant really blame China for not wanting to be part of that.
 
Then we're leaving out Google, and X.
Google definitely is a problem child. Like Meta your information is currency. Additionally, searches on Google has proven to suppress, or via ranking, information favorable to one party vs the other rather than allowing both sides to show in the search equally.


DuckDuckGo, though it uses Bing, does protect personal identifiable information (PII).


 
Back