Connect with us


The Facebook Oversight Board upholds Trump ban, But how for how long?



The board urged Facebook to re-examine its decision and issue a revised conclusion after six months.

The Facebook Oversight Board has voted against the reinstatement of accounts belonging to former President Donald Trump Wednesday, upholding the company’s decision to ban his account following The Jan. 6 riots at the U.S. Capitol.

The board also directed Facebook, however, to revisit the decision “to be able to justify and determine the proportionate response, and to issue the new conclusion within six months.”

“It was inappropriate to Facebook to impose an indefinite and non-standard penalty of a suspended indefinitely,” this decision states. “Facebook’s standard penalties include taking down the content in violation and imposing a time-bound duration in suspension or shutting down the account and the page.”

The board noted two posts from January. 6 that “severely infringed” Facebook’s guidelines. In one of his posts, he expressed his gratitude to those demonstrating at the Capitol by declaring they were “very exceptional.” In another post, he called the protesters “great Patriots” and said he would “remember this day for all time.” Both of the comments, the board determined, violated Facebook’s guidelines against glorifying violence.

“At the moment of Ms. Trump’s comments, there was an evident immediate danger of injury, and his declarations of support for the people involved in the riots justified the violence of those involved,” the board wrote.

The board also criticized Facebook for issuing the “indefinite” suspension, which the panel noted is not in Facebook’s policies. “In applying a vague, unproven penalty, and then referring the issue for the Board to decide, Facebook seeks to avoid its obligations,” the board wrote in a letter to Facebook’s critics who have made similar arguments. Similar.

In a conference call with reporters after the announcement, the board’s chairman Michael McConnell, who serves as the director for the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School, criticized Facebook for “apparently believing for what board members would take action what it would have done if they had not.”

“We do not police with a broader view of social media and tackling the world’s problems,” McConnell said. “Our primary responsibility is holding the powerful company, Facebook, accountable for making clear constant, and transparent choices without fear or favor to those with power in the political realm.”

McConnell said there’s a “substantial chance” that the Facebook board will be requested to review the Facebook decision in six months’ time.

“We wrote at the beginning of January that we believed our decision was both necessary and appropriate, and we’re happy that the board has acknowledged that the extraordinary circumstances justify the unusual step we adopted.” Facebook vice president of global affairs, as well as communications Nick Clegg, said in a written statement. “We are now evaluating the board’s decision and deciding the best action, which is transparent and proportional. In the meantime, Mr. Trump’s accounts are still suspended.”

The board’s decision contained a variety of suggestions for Facebook, calling for more transparency in its decisions. The first suggestion was that the political content of “highly prominent individuals” should be swiftly transferred to experienced, skilled human reviewers who are acquainted with the content and language. The staff members should be “insulated from economic and political influence and undue influences,” the board suggests.

The board also asks Facebook to clarify in its policies how it comes to these decisions, what it stores and distributes information, and what its strike and sanctions procedures are, and include more details in its transparency reports regularly. Facebook should “undertake an extensive examination” of how its presence and design have been a factor in the spread of false information about electoral fraud. The board stated: “This should be an open examination of the policy and design decisions that Facebook has made which could let its platform be used to extort.”

Ultimately, the board stressed that the decision was not solely about Trump. However, it was for everyone in an “ad-hockery” in Facebook’s guidelines in the manner McConnell said.

“Anyone concerned about Facebook’s exaggerated concentration of power must be happy with this announcement by the Oversight Board telling Facebook that they can’t invent new rules without a written document whenever they want,” board chair Helle Thorning-Schmidt who was the former Danish Premier, spoke to reporters.

However, this decision could have significant consequences for Trump. After his abrupt removal of Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, Trump has lost access to his most potent weapon – social media. Although he’s still a frequent guest appearance on Fox News and has given prominent speeches at Republican events, his profile has decreased significantly since leaving the presidency. The decision of the board to exclude Trump from the platform at most for a while is a severe challenge to the legitimacy of Trump’s plan of running for the presidency in 2024. It also raises the possibility that Facebook could be forced to investigate other global leaders who violate its policies.

Although many have dismissed the Oversight Board as a Facebook PR stunt, there’s no doubt that an extended suspension could impact the coming races in the U.S. and abroad. If polls are and they are to be believed, Trump is still the preferred candidate to become the Republican presidential candidate within the next four years. Facebook has tried to show its political neutrality throughout the years and may soon find itself preventing a prominent contender for an American president from using the site. At the same time, everyone else is granted access to Facebook’s three billion users and its hyper-targeted advertising tools. Even if Trump does not run for the next election, his deplatforming efforts could hinder his ability to be the role of kingmaker in Republican politics at large.

The repercussions of the board’s decision or inability to make it — were overwhelming. “Instead of dealing with the primary problems with its platform, the company took advantage of this fragile moment in our history to convince us of the fanciful story of this oversight committee. I don’t believe it. They’re now kicking the can further down the road once more,” said Media Matters for America president Angelo Carusone.

“Unless Facebook permanently bans Trump immediately, we’ll have this spectacular sideshow for six months.”

The decision to keep the ban also confirms the unsubstantiated claim made by circles of Right-wing circles that Facebook has been biased toward conservatives for years. “Facebook’s decision to keep its ban on President Donald Trump is extremely disappointing. It’s evident that Mark Zuckerberg views himself as the ultimate arbiter of freedom of speech,” Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn stated in an announcement.

The board’s decision is close to advise from the vast majority of civil rights groups and certain ex-Facebook employees who advocated against the possibility of letting Trump come back to Facebook in their comments to the committee. “There is no doubt that there could be some close calls with a policy that allows for the de-platforming of leaders from political parties under extreme situations,” read one letter that was signed by several academics, including Alex Stamos, Facebook’s former security chief and the current director at the Stanford Internet Observatory. “This is not one of the cases.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply


Why did Daniel Patry Break His Gabriel Kuhn Body Into Two Parts, despite being friends?



16-year-old after Gabriel Kuhn, 12, refused to repay $1.75 for virtual currencies, Daniel Patry sodomized him as well as killed him and cut to pieces his corpse. What began as a means to allow Gabriel Kuhn, then 12, to make new friends and have a blast was turned into the death penalty when he was introduced to Daniel Patry, then 16.

Due to his past of violent outbursts, Daniel’s parents referred the boy to a variety of Brazilian psychiatrists with the hope that one of them would help their son of 16 years. Daniel was scared of doctors and refused to open up to them. However, his aggressive behaviour in therapy eventually led Daniel to quit attending therapy.

Some claim he was in a psychiatric institution, and others claim that he quit attending classes. Neither claim has been confirmed.

Daniel, most of the time, was on the internet engaging in Tibia games. Daniel played for hours and hours playing the Tribia monster in his interactions online with other gamers.

A Conversation between Gabriel Kuhn and Daniel Patry

During one of his lengthy games, Daniel was able to meet Gabriel as Daniel and Gabriel moved next door to one another and acted as fast acquaintances.

There were lots of coins available to spend in the no-cost Tribia game. Coins can be used to purchase everything within the game, including new characters and outfits and virtual animals.

Gabriel has created a private server to ensure that Gabriel as well as Daniel can play the game together. Gabriel once contacted Daniel and asked that he take a loan to borrow virtual currency so that the player could buy items from the virtual store of the game. Gabriel needed 20 thousand pennies, or around $1.75, to purchase something in American currency. After a few days, Gabriel said he would return the coins. Daniel took the loan offer.

When Daniel attempted to log in to the game one of the days Gabriel was scheduled to return the money, he discovered that he was barred off the servers.

Daniel Patry Meets Gabriel At Home

Daniel Patry

Daniel was irritated and decided to decide to pay Gabriel an unexpected visit to his home. When Daniel finally came to Gabriel’s house, He had already decided to end Gabriel, his “buddy.”

When Daniel returned home, Gabriel was there by herself. Although Daniel due Daniel the money and blocked Daniel from his server, He had no idea that the teenager was capable of such a rage. To try to repair the fences between him and his friend, Gabriel welcomed him inside, and he entered.

After entering the house, Daniel immediately launched an attack upon Gabriel and slashed the boy, who was smaller in size and brutally beat him several times.

While Gabriel lay on the ground in pain as well as bleeding, Daniel was laughing at his ridicule. Gabriel then declared (with determination) that he was telling his mother about the incident Daniel did.

Daniel cut the computer cord of Gabriel and began to choke Gabriel. The incident reportedly sparked his sexual desire, and he launched into a sexual attack on Gabriel while he continued to tighten cords around his neck.

Daniel Hems Gabriel’s Body into Two

Daniel believed that Gabriel had died and attempted to squeeze his body into the crawl space but failed. He found a hacksaw within the house and began cutting Gabriel’s body up into small pieces, thinking that this was the most convenient method to move the body.

Thankfully, Gabriel had not yet died. Then, he fell and screamed. Daniel was awed by the possibility of being able to hear Gabriel screaming and fighting. Despite Gabriel’s pleas for help, he kept cutting his body until it was split into two pieces.

He tried to stuff Gabriel’s head and body into the crawlspace after creating Tibia symbols inside his body. When he realized that his body would be too large, Daniel abandoned it in the hallway and ran away. The following day, Gabriel’s brother discovered the grisly scene.

Daniel admits to killing.

Gabriel Kuhn Murder

When the police first learned of the dispute on the internet, and were able to question Daniel. Daniel admitted to having killed Gabriel and also provided the investigators with gory details of the incident. Daniel didn’t appear to feel guilty as he recounted his experiences.

The moment they learned that Daniel had been sodomized by Gabriel and had sex with him, they believed they were homosexual. In response, he snarled and denied his homosexuality.

Gabriel spent three years in a Juvenile detention Center.

Daniel Patry was tried and was found guilty by the courts in Brazil as a young man and found guilty of three-year imprisonment in a juvenile detention facility. The prison sentence was lifted in 2010, and Daniel was released. Following Daniel’s release, his whereabouts and whereabouts were largely unrecorded. Perhaps he’s been using the name of a different person now.

Follow us on for news. Be sure to bookmark our website to stay up-to-date with the latest news. Also, you can tell us in the comments section if you’d like to know more regarding any other related subject in this particular case.

Continue Reading


%d bloggers like this: