(PatrioticPost.com)- On March 11, Facebook announced that it was temporarily changing its content policy within Ukraine so Ukrainian Facebook and Instagram users could openly voice their opposition to Russia’s invasion.
Under the “temporary” policy change, Ukrainian Facebook and Instagram users would not be censored by content moderators if they posted things like “death to the Russian invaders.”
Naturally, Ukrainian users leaped at the chance to call for the death of Russian President Vladimir Putin, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, and pretty much every other Russian on the planet.
And Russia was not amused.
Russian prosecutors asked a court to designate Facebook as an “extremist organization” in connection to Ukrainian users calling for death and violence against Russian citizens.
Realizing that the company opened a can of worms, three days later, Meta global affairs President Nick Clegg announced it was narrowing the focus of its temporary change to “remove any ambiguity” and “make it explicitly clear” that it was never supposed to be interpreted as condoning violence against Russians.
Clegg wrote that the social media giant does not permit calls to assassinate heads of state and it “stands against Russophobia.” Clegg said Meta would not tolerate calls for “genocide, ethnic cleansing” or any discrimination, harassment, or violence against Russians on Facebook or Instagram.
Clegg tried to make excuses for the bungled policy change, arguing that the situation in Ukraine is “fast-moving.” He said Meta is trying to “think through all the consequences” of its actions and will keep its moderation guidelines under “constant review” as “the context is always evolving.”
Clegg concluded that there would be no change to Facebook’s policies on hate speech.
So why on earth did Facebook temporarily change its policy? Surely Facebook isn’t so naïve as to think that, if given the chance, Ukrainians wouldn’t call for the death of Putin or wish death on its enemies.
The “ambiguity” here was entirely the fault of Facebook.
The social media platform could’ve just left in place their content moderation policy prohibiting calls for violence and spared themselves the trouble.
