Censorship by Facebook

In Germany, Facebook actively censors anti-immigrant speech, claiming they are reviewing posts more stringently and using legal opinions and language experts to determine whether users' comments are infringing on German law.{{cite news |first=Anthony |last=Faiola |title=Germany springs to action over hate speech against migrants |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/germany-springs-to-action-over-hate-speech-against-migrants/2016/01/06/6031218e-b315-11e5-8abc-d09392edc612_story.html |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=January 6, 2016 |access-date=June 4, 2017}}{{cite web |first1=Rush |last1=Bender |first2=Sam |last2=Schechner |title=Facebook Outlines Measures to Combat Racist and Xenophobic Content |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-outlines-new-measures-to-combat-racist-and-xenophobic-content-1442242351 |website=The Wall Street Journal |date=September 14, 2015 |access-date=June 4, 2017}}{{cite web |first=Amar |last=Toor |title=Facebook will work with Germany to combat anti-refugee hate speech |url=https://www.theverge.com/2015/9/15/9329119/facebook-germany-hate-speech-xenophobia-migrant-refugee |website=The Verge |date=September 15, 2015 |access-date=June 4, 2017}}

In May 2016, Facebook and other technology companies agreed to a new "code of conduct" by the European Commission to review hateful online content within 24{{spaces}}hours of being notified, and subsequently remove such content if necessary.{{cite web |first=Amar |last=Toor |title=Facebook, Twitter, Google, and Microsoft agree to EU hate speech rules |url=https://www.theverge.com/2016/5/31/11817540/facebook-twitter-google-microsoft-hate-speech-europe |website=The Verge |date=May 31, 2016 |access-date=June 4, 2017}}{{cite web |first=Alex |last=Hern |title=Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Microsoft sign EU hate speech code |url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/31/facebook-youtube-twitter-microsoft-eu-hate-speech-code |website=The Guardian |date=May 31, 2016 |access-date=June 4, 2017}}{{cite web |first=Romain |last=Dillet |title=Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Microsoft agree to remove hate speech across the EU |url=https://techcrunch.com/2016/05/31/facebook-twitter-youtube-and-microsoft-agree-to-remove-hate-speech-across-the-eu/ |website=TechCrunch |publisher=AOL |date=May 31, 2016 |access-date=June 4, 2017}} A year later, Reuters reported that the European Union had approved proposals to make Facebook and other technology companies tackle hate speech content on their platforms, but that a final agreement in the European Parliament is needed to make the proposals into law.{{cite web |first=Julia |last=Fioretti |title=EU states approve plans to make social media firms tackle hate speech |url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-eu-hatespeech-socialmedia-idUKKBN18J25C |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170523163320/http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-eu-hatespeech-socialmedia-idUKKBN18J25C |url-status=dead |archive-date=May 23, 2017 |work=Reuters |date=May 23, 2017 |access-date=June 4, 2017}}{{cite web |first=Amar |last=Toor |title=EU close to making Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter block hate speech videos |url=https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/24/15684168/eu-hate-speech-law-facebook-twitter-youtube-video |website=The Verge |date=May 24, 2017 |access-date=June 4, 2017}} In June 2017, the European Commission praised Facebook's efforts in fighting hateful content, having reviewed "nearly 58{{spaces}}percent of flagged content within 24{{spaces}}hours".{{cite web |first=Amar |last=Toor |title=Facebook earns EU praise for combatting hate speech, as Twitter and YouTube lag behind |url=https://www.theverge.com/2017/6/2/15728268/facebook-twitter-youtube-hate-speech-europe-removal |website=The Verge |date=June 2, 2017 |access-date=June 4, 2017}}{{cite web |first1=Alastair |last1=Macdonald |first2=Julia |last2=Fioretti |title=Social media firms have increased removals of online hate speech: EU |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-hatespeech-idUSKBN18S3FO |work=Reuters |date=June 1, 2017 |access-date=June 4, 2017}}

Facebook has worked with Pakistani government to censor "blasphemous" pages and speech inside Pakistan, censoring 54 posts in the second half of 2014.{{Cite web

|url=http://tribune.com.pk/story/855030/facebook-censored-54-posts-for-blasphemy-in-pakistan-in-second-half-of-2014/

| title = Facebook censored 54 posts for 'blasphemy' in Pakistan in second half of 2014 – The Express Tribune

| website = The Express Tribune

| date = March 17, 2015

| language = en-US

| access-date = March 1, 2016

}}

{{Excerpt|2023 Canadian wildfires|Facebook blocking wildfire news stories}}

{{anchor|Competitors' Social Networks}}

In October 2018, Facebook and Facebook Messenger was said to be blocking URLs to Minds, a social network website that is a competitor of Facebook.{{cite news |last=Dube Dwilson |first=Stephanie |date=October 13, 2018 |title=Yes, Facebook Is Blocking Minds Links as 'Unsecure' |url=https://heavy.com/tech/2018/10/facebook-block-minds-com-unsecure/ |work=Heavy.com |access-date=October 21, 2018 }} Users have complained that Facebook marks links to Facebook's competitor as "insecure" and have to fill a CAPTCHA to share it with other users. In 2015, Facebook was accused of banning rival network Tsu in a similar manner.{{cite news |last=Klint |first=Finley |date=November 11, 2015 |title=Facebook is blocking an upstart rival – but it's complicated |url=https://www.wired.com/2015/11/facebook-banning-tsu-rival-social-network/ |magazine=Wired |access-date=October 21, 2018 }}

In May 2016, Facebook was accused by a former employee of leaving out conservative topics from the trending bar.{{cite news|last1=Bowles|first1=Nellie|last2=Thielman|first2=Sam|title=Facebook accused of censoring conservatives, report says|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/09/facebook-newsfeed-censor-conservative-news|access-date=May 25, 2016|work=The Guardian|date=May 9, 2016|language=en-GB}}
{{cite web |url=https://gizmodo.com/former-facebook-workers-we-routinely-suppressed-conser-1775461006 |title=Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News |last=Nunez |first=Gizmodo |date=May 9, 2016 |website=Gizmodo.com|access-date=September 8, 2018 }} Although Facebook denied these allegations, the site planned to improve the trending bar.{{cite news|last1=Hunt|first1=Elle|title=Facebook to change trending topics after investigation into bias claims|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/24/facebook-changes-trending-topics-anti-conservative-bias|access-date=May 25, 2016|work=The Guardian|date=May 24, 2016}}

In August 2018, Facebook deleted videos posted to it by PragerU. Facebook later reversed its decision and restored the PragerU content, saying that PragerU content was falsely reported to have hate speech.{{cite news |author= |date=August 20, 2018 |title=Facebook apologises for blocking Prager University's videos |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-45247302 |publisher=BBC |access-date=August 22, 2018 }}{{cite news |last=Zhou |first=Marrian |date=August 21, 2018 |title=Facebook apologizes for removing conservative PragerU videos |url=https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-apologizes-for-removing-videos-from-conservative-page-prageru/ |publisher=CNET |access-date=August 22, 2018 }}

As a result of perception that conservatives are not treated neutrally on Facebook, alternative social media platforms have been established.{{cite news |last=Schwartz |first=Jason |date=March 29, 2018 |title=Conservative outlets take on Facebook |url=https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/29/conservatives-facebook-liberal-bias-490920 |work=Politico |access-date=September 8, 2018 }} This perception has led to a reduction of trust in Facebook, and reduction of usage by those who consider themselves to be conservative.{{cite news |last=Flood |first=Brian |date=September 5, 2018 |title=Conservatives ditching Facebook over trust issues and fears of political bias, study shows |url=http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/09/04/conservatives-ditching-facebook-over-trust-issues-and-fears-political-bias-study-shows.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180905053944/http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/09/04/conservatives-ditching-facebook-over-trust-issues-and-fears-political-bias-study-shows.html |archive-date=September 5, 2018 |publisher=Fox News Channel |access-date=September 8, 2018 }}

In July 2020, Congressman Matt Gaetz filed a criminal referral against Facebook citing that evidence produced by Project Veritas demonstrated that Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, had made materially false statements to Congress while under oath in hearings which occurred in April 2018.{{Cite web|date=July 27, 2020|title=Congressman Matt Gaetz Files Criminal Referral Against Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg|url=https://gaetz.house.gov/media/press-releases/congressman-matt-gaetz-files-criminal-referral-against-facebook-ceo-mark|access-date=July 28, 2020|website=Congressman Matt Gaetz|language=en}}{{Cite web|title=Matt Gaetz Files Criminal Referral Against Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Urges William Barr To Investigate|url=https://www.floridadaily.com/matt-gaetz-files-criminal-referral-against-facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerberg-urges-william-barr-to-investigate/|access-date=July 28, 2020|website=Florida Daily|date=July 27, 2020 |language=en-US}} Congressman Gaetz claimed that the evidence provided demonstrated that Zuckerberg's claims that the website did not engage in bias against conservative speech were false.

Facebook has been accused of censoring several posts related to COVID-19 vaccines. In October 2020, Facebook is said to have censored a claim the COVID-19 vaccines were imminent.{{Cite web |last=Shellenberger |first=Michael |date=2022-06-14 |title=Why The Biden Admin Wants Censorship Of Renewable Energy Critics |url=https://michaelshellenberger.substack.com/p/why-the-biden-admin-wants-censorship |access-date=2022-06-15 |website=Michael Shellenberger}} On 2 November 2021, The BMJ published a piece by journalist Paul D. Thacker alleging there has been "poor practice" at Ventavia, one of the companies involved in the phase III evaluation trials of the Pfizer vaccine.{{cite journal |last1=Thacker |first1=Paul D. |title=Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer's vaccine trial |journal=BMJ |date=2 November 2021 |volume=375 |pages=n2635 |doi=10.1136/bmj.n2635 |pmid=34728500 |s2cid=240424253 |url=https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635 |language=en |issn=1756-1833|doi-access=free |url-access=subscription }}{{cite journal |vauthors=Thacker PD |title=Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer's vaccine trial |journal=BMJ |volume=375 |issue= |pages=n2635 |date=November 2021 |pmid=34728500 |doi=10.1136/bmj.n2635 |s2cid=240424253 |quote=A regional director who was employed at the research organisation Ventavia Research Group has told The BMJ that the company falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators, and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported|doi-access=free }} The BMJ sent an open letter to Mark Zuckerberg explaining that "from November 10, readers began reporting a variety of problems when trying to share our article. Some reported being unable to share it. Many others reported having their posts flagged with a warning about "Missing context ... Independent fact-checkers say this information could mislead people." Those trying to post the article were informed by Facebook that people who repeatedly share "false information" might have their posts moved lower in Facebook's News Feed. Group administrators where the article was shared received messages from Facebook informing them that such posts were "partly false." Readers were directed to a "fact check" performed by a Facebook contractor named Lead Stories.".{{cite web |title=Open letter from The BMJ to Mark Zuckerberg |url=https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635/rr-80 |language=en |date=17 December 2021}}{{cite web |title=Fact Check: The British Medical Journal Did NOT Reveal Disqualifying And Ignored Reports Of Flaws In Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Trials |website=Lead Stories |date=November 10, 2021 |url=https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2021/11/fact-check-british-medical-journal-did-not-reveal-disqualifying-and-ignored-reports-of-flaws-in-pfizer-vaccine-trial.html}}

{{see also|Criticism of Facebook}}

Newspapers regularly report stories of users who claim they've been censored on Facebook for being critical of Facebook itself, with their posts removed or made less visible. Examples include Elizabeth Warren in 2019{{cite web|first1=Makena|last1=Kelly|access-date=February 25, 2020|title=Facebook proves Elizabeth Warren's point by deleting her ads about breaking up Facebook|url=https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/11/18260857/facebook-senator-elizabeth-warren-campaign-ads-removal-tech-break-up-regulation|date=March 11, 2019|website=The Verge}} and Rotem Shtarkman in 2016.{{cite news|first1=Oded|last1=Yaron|access-date=February 25, 2020|title=Is Facebook Censoring Posts Critical of the Social Media Giant?|url=https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-is-facebook-censoring-posts-critical-of-the-social-media-giant-1.5427643|newspaper=Haaretz|date=August 23, 2016}}

Facebook has systems to monitor specific terms and keywords and trigger automatic or semi-automatic action.{{cite news|first1=Lois|last1=Beckett|access-date=February 25, 2020|title=Facebook to ban white nationalism and separatism content|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/mar/27/facebook-white-nationalism-hate-speech-ban|newspaper=The Guardian|date=March 27, 2019}} In the context of media reports{{cite news|first1=Alex|last1=Hern|access-date=February 25, 2020|title=Facebook moderators tell of strict scrutiny and PTSD symptoms|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/feb/26/facebook-moderators-tell-of-strict-scrutiny-and-ptsd-symptoms|newspaper=The Guardian|date=February 26, 2019}} and lawsuits{{cite news|first1=Alex|last1=Hern|access-date=February 25, 2020|title=Ex-Facebook worker claims disturbing content led to PTSD|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/dec/04/ex-facebook-worker-claims-disturbing-content-led-to-ptsd|newspaper=The Guardian|date=December 4, 2019}} from people formerly working on Facebook content moderation, a former Facebook moderator (Chris Gray) has claimed that specific rules existed to monitor and sometimes target posts about Facebook which are anti-Facebook or criticize Facebook for some action, for instance by matching the keywords "Facebook" or "DeleteFacebook".{{Cite book|last=Nycyk|first=Michael|url=https://www.academia.edu/43676571|title=Facebook: Exploring the Social Network and its Challenges|date=January 2020 |language=en}}

{{see also|Criticism of Israel}}

Facebook has been accused of censoring messages critical of Israel and supportive of Palestine. During conflict over the Sheikh Jarrah controversy in 2021, Facebook was accused of deleting hundreds of posts critical of Israel.{{cite news |last1=Paul |first1=Kari |title=Facebook under fire as human rights groups claim 'censorship' of pro-Palestine posts |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/may/26/pro-palestine-censorship-facebook-instagram |access-date=May 28, 2021 |work=The Guardian |date=May 26, 2021}} Senior Facebook officials apologized to the Palestinian Prime Minister for censoring pro-Palestinian voices.{{cite news |last1=Perrigo |first1=Billy |title=Inside Facebook's Meeting With Palestinian Officials Over Posts Inaccurately Flagged as Incitement to Violence |url=https://time.com/6050350/palestinian-content-facebook/ |access-date=May 28, 2021 |magazine=Time |date=May 21, 2021}}

Al Jazeera Arabic presenter Tamer Almisshal has had his Facebook profile deleted by Meta 24{{spaces}}hours after the programme "Tip of the Iceberg" aired an investigation into Meta's censorship of Palestinian content titled The Locked Space. The programme's investigation, included admissions by Eric Barbing, former head of Israel's cybersecurity apparatus, about his organisation's effort to track Palestinian content according to criteria that included "liking" a photo of a Palestinian killed by Israeli forces.{{Cite web |date=10 Sep 2023 |title=Meta deletes Al Jazeera presenter's profile after show criticising Israel |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/10/meta-deletes-al-jazeera-presenters-profile-after-show-criticising-israel?sf181668216=1 }}

Human Rights Watch released a report "Meta's Broken Promises: Systemic Censorship of Palestine Content on Instagram and Facebook," in December 2023, demonstrating patterns in suppressing protected speech and content in support of Palestinian nationalism.{{Cite web |date=2023-12-20 |title=Meta: Systemic Censorship of Palestine Content |url=https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/20/meta-systemic-censorship-palestine-content |access-date=2023-12-21 |website=Human Rights Watch |language=en}} Also in December 2023, Elizabeth Warren wrote a letter to Meta requesting details on content moderation related to Gaza. Following a response, Warren was joined by Bernie Sanders in a follow-up letter asking for more comprehensive answers. A February 2024 Access Now report details the censorship of Palestinian reporters and advocates on Facebook, including removing documentation of human rights abuses.{{Cite web |last=Biddle |first=Sam |date=2024-03-26 |title=Meta Refuses to Answer Questions on Gaza Censorship, Say Sens. Warren and Sanders |url=https://theintercept.com/2024/03/26/meta-gaza-censorship-warren-sanders/ |access-date=2024-03-26 |website=The Intercept |language=en-US}}{{Cite web |last=Fatafta |first=Marwa |date=19 February 2024 |title=How Meta censors Palestinian voices |url=https://www.accessnow.org/publication/how-meta-censors-palestinian-voices/ |access-date=2024-03-26 |website=Access Now |language=en}}

In 2024, Meta restricted use of 🔻, the Down-Pointing Red Triangle emoji, with internal policy stating that the emoji was a proxy for support of Hamas.{{Cite web |last=Biddle |first=Sam |date=2024-10-02 |title=Facebook and Instagram Restrict the Use of the Red Triangle Emoji Over Hamas Association |url=https://theintercept.com/2024/10/02/meta-facebook-instagram-red-triangle-emoji/ |access-date=2024-10-21 |website=The Intercept |language=en-US}}{{Cite web |last=DiBenedetto |first=Chase |date=2024-10-04 |title=Meta deems red triangle a proxy for Hamas support, will enforce removal |url=https://mashable.com/article/meta-facebook-instagram-red-triangle-hamas-ban?test_uuid=01iI2GpryXngy77uIpA3Y4B&test_variant=b |access-date=2024-10-21 |website=Mashable |language=en}}

In response to the publication of Careless People and U.S. Senate testimony of Sarah Wynn-Williams,{{Cite web |date=2025-04-14 |title=Facebook’s content review practices in Taiwan allegedly influenced by CCP |url=https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/news/6084105 |access-date=2025-04-25 |website=Taiwan News |language=en}} Taiwanese Democratic Progressive Party legislators called for further scrutiny of Facebook regarding allegations of its censorship of content critical of the Chinese government.{{Cite web |date=2025-04-25 |title=Taiwan should confront Meta, DPP legislator says |url=https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2025/04/25/2003835801 |access-date=2025-04-25 |website=Taipei Times}}

Facebook's search function has been accused of preventing users from searching for certain terms. Michael Arrington of TechCrunch has written about Facebook's possible censorship of "Ron Paul" as a search term. MoveOn's Facebook group for organizing protests against privacy violations could for a time not be found by searching. The very word privacy was also restricted.Michael Arrington, [https://techcrunch.com/2007/11/22/is-facebook-really-censoring-search-when-it-suits-them/ Is Facebook Really Censoring Search When It Suits Them?], TechCrunch, November 22, 2007

Facebook has a policy of removing photos which they believe violate the terms and conditions of the website. Images have been removed from user pages on topics such as breastfeeding,{{Cite web|title=Facebook Censored Breastfeeding. Sadly, I Wasn't Surprised.|url=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/facebook-censored-breastfeeding-sadly-i-wasnt-surprised_b_7992078|date=August 17, 2015|website=HuffPost|language=en|access-date=May 8, 2020}} nudity in art, apparent breasts (including round marzipan balls on an Easter simnel cake), naked mannequins,{{Cite web|title=Naked mannequin photographer banned from Facebook|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/39326509/naked-mannequin-photographer-banned-from-facebook|last=Tijou|first=Sarah|date=March 20, 2017|website=BBC Newsbeat|language=en-GB|access-date=May 8, 2020}} kisses between persons of the same sex and family photos.Spanish newspaper El País, [http://verne.elpais.com/verne/2015/03/11/articulo/1426096766_908610.html Estas son las imágenes que Facebook no quiso que vieras] Ana Marcos, March 16, 2013. Retrieved March 17, 2015

Facebook made several statements that it would not censor nudity per se (without sexual activity) in paintings and sculptures (but not photography). In 2011, for instance, Facebook spokesperson Simon Axton declared: "We don't censor art and have no intention to."{{Cite web |last=Cordova |first=Ruben C. |title=Facebook and the Art of Censorship [Updated] |url=https://glasstire.com/2018/12/15/facebook-and-the-art-of-censorship/ |access-date=March 22, 2023 |website=Glasstire}} Nonetheless, it has often censored images of art posted on Facebook, including: Venus of Willendorf, {{circa}} 28,000–25,000{{spaces}}BC, Naturhistorisches Museum (Vienna); Giambologna's bronze statue of Neptune (1560s), the symbol of the city of Bologna; Caravaggio's painting Amor Vincit Omnia (Love conquers all,1602), Berlin, Gemäldegalerie, (2016); Edvard Eriksen's The Little Mermaid (1913), which is the most photographed artwork in Denmark. The most famous case is that of French educator Frédéric Durand, whose account was deleted "without warning" because he posted Gustave Courbet's painting The Origin of the World (1886). After seven years of deliberations, a French court ruled against Facebook, though it granted no damages to Durand.{{Cite web |last=Rea |first=Naomi |date=March 15, 2018 |title=A French Court Rules That Facebook Was Wrong to Censor Gustave Courbet's Provocative 'Origin of the World' |url=https://news.artnet.com/art-world/facebook-censorship-gustave-courbet-1245458 |website=artnet news}} Art Historian Ruben C. Cordova's account was "permanently deleted" after he posted 16 images of John De Andrea's hyperrealist Self-Portrait with Sculpture (1980), featured in the Metropolitan Museum of Art's exhibition Like Life: Sculpture, Color, and the Body, though his account was ultimately restored.{{Cite web |last=Small |first=Zachary |date=November 27, 2018 |title=Facebook Censors Art Historian for Posting Nude Art, Then Boots Him from Platform |url=https://hyperallergic.com/472706/facebook-censors-art-historian-for-posting-nude-art-then-boots-him-from-platform/ |access-date=March 22, 2023 |website=Hyperallergic}}

In 2019, Facebook invited twenty artists and curators to discuss a "reconsideration" of Facebook and Instagram guidelines, but three years later, artists think nothing has improved. Moreover, instead of "Nudity" violations, some artist have received "Adult Sexual Solicitation" notices, which means "that artists are now not only trying to defend their subject matter, but the premise of their practice."{{Cite web |last=Shapiro |first=Emma |title=Three years after censorship meeting, Meta is still not listening to artists |url=https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2022/06/10/three-years-after-censorship-meeting-meta-is-still-not-listening-to-artists |access-date=March 22, 2023 |website=The Art Newspaper|date=June 10, 2022 }}

Out of frustration with censorship on social media, several museums in Vienna united to open an account on OnlyFans, which is dedicated to adult content. According to the Vienna Tourist Board: "Vienna and its art institutions are among the casualties of this new wave of prudishness—with nude statues and famous artworks blacklisted under social media guidelines, and repeat offenders even finding their accounts temporarily suspended... there are no clear guidelines on these platforms, nor rhyme or reason, in regards to what nudity is considered ‘offensive’ and what nudity is not."{{Cite web |last=Wallace |first=Rachel |date=October 21, 2021 |title=Vienna Museums Turn to OnlyFans to Avoid Censorship |url=https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/vienna-museums-turn-to-onlyfans-to-avoid-censorship |website=Architectural Digest}}

In September 2016, Norwegian author Tom Egeland published Nick Ut's iconic napalm girl photo on his Facebook page as part of a list of iconic war time photographs. He was banned for publishing "a picture of a nude child". A few weeks later, the newspaper Aftenposten published an open letter to Zuckerberg after the banning of "Napalm Girl", a Pulitzer Prize-winning documentary photograph from the Vietnam War made by Nick Ut.Norway newspaper aftenposten, [http://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/kommentar/Dear-Mark-I-am-writing-this-to-inform-you-that-I-shall-not-comply-with-your-requirement-to-remove-this-picture-604156b.html Dear Mark. I am writing this to inform you that I shall not comply with your requirement to remove this picture.] Espen Egil Hansen, September 9, 2016 Half of the ministers in the Norwegian government shared the famous Nick Ut photo on their Facebook pages, among them prime minister Erna Solberg from the Conservative Party (Høyre). But after only a few hours, several of the Facebook posts, including the Prime Minister's post, were deleted by Facebook.Norway newspaper aftenposten, [http://www.aftenposten.no/norge/Norways-prime-minister-and-several-government-members-censored-by-Facebook-604195b.html Norway's prime minister and several government members censored by Facebook] Kristin Jonassen Nordby, September 9, 2016

As a reaction to the letter, Facebook reconsidered its opinion on this picture and republished it, recognizing "the history and global importance of this image in documenting a particular moment in time".{{cite web|url=http://www.recode.net/2016/9/9/12864670/facebook-photo-ban-changed|title=Facebook changes its mind, and says it's okay to publish an iconic war photo, after all|first=Peter|last=Kafka|date=September 9, 2016|website=Recode.net|access-date=October 25, 2016}}

Facebook has been repeatedly criticized for removing photos uploaded by mothers breastfeeding their babies. Although photos that show an exposed breast violate Facebook's decency code, photos were removed even when the baby covered the nipple.

The breastfeeding photo controversy continued following public protests and the growth in membership of a Facebook group titled "Hey, Facebook, breastfeeding is not obscene! (Official petition to Facebook)."{{cite news|url=http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_11321458?source%253Dmost_viewed.20F88DA3D7D369F5BB70F372987EAE1F.html|title=Protests mount over Facebook ban on breast-feeding photos; bigger turnout online than in Palo Alto|newspaper=Mercury News|date=December 27, 2008}} In December 2011, Facebook removed photos of mothers breastfeeding and after public criticism, restored the photos. The company said it removed the photos they believed violated the pornographic rules in the company's terms and conditions.{{cite news|last=McGinty|first=Bill|title=Facebook apologizes for removing breastfeeding photo|url=http://www.wcnc.com/home/Facebook-does-about-face-on-breast-feeding-photo-136442808.html|access-date=February 17, 2012|newspaper=WCNC.COM|date=December 30, 2011|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120410065745/http://www.wcnc.com/home/Facebook-does-about-face-on-breast-feeding-photo-136442808.html|archive-date=April 10, 2012}} During February 2012, the company renewed its policy of removing photos of mothers breastfeeding. Founders of a Facebook group "Respect the Breast" reported that "women say they are tired of people lashing out at what is natural and what they believe is healthy for their children."{{cite news|last=McGinty|first=Bill|title=Photos on breastfeeding Facebook page removed again|url=http://www.wcnc.com/news/health/Breastfeeding-photos-taken-down-off-Facebook-139464913.html|access-date=February 17, 2012|newspaper=WCNC.COM|date=February 16, 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120410065749/http://www.wcnc.com/news/health/Breastfeeding-photos-taken-down-off-Facebook-139464913.html|archive-date=April 10, 2012}}

On February 4, 2010, a number of Facebook groups against the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) were removed without any reason given.{{cite news|author=+ name + |url=http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/template/apple/art_main.php?&iss_id=20100205&sec_id=4104&art_id=13699972 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140103050242/http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20100205/13699972 |archive-date=2014-01-03 |script-title=zh:組員逾八萬 疑有人眼寃不斷施壓 facebook鏟走反民建聯群組 |newspaper=Apple Daily |language=zh |location=Hong Kong |date=2010-02-05 |access-date=February 23, 2014}} The DAB is one of the largest pro-Beijing political parties in Hong Kong. The affected groups have since been restored.

In 2016, Facebook banned and also removed content regarding the Kashmir dispute, triggering a response from The Guardian, BBC and other media groups on Facebook's policies on censorship.[https://www.bbc.com/news/world-south-asia-36906242 Photoshopped celebrities used for Kashmir pellet gun campaign]. BBC News, July 28, 2016.Doshi, Vidhi. 2016. [https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/19/facebook-under-fire-censoring-kashmir-posts-accounts Facebook under fire for 'censoring' Kashmir-related posts and accounts]. The Guardian, July 19, 2016. Facebook censorship policies have been criticized especially after the company banned the posts about the Indian army's attack on protesters, including children, with pellet guns.Lakshmi, Rama. 2016. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/07/27/facebook-is-censoring-posts-on-indian-kashmir-some-say/ Facebook is censoring some posts on Indian Kashmir]. The Washington Post, July 27, 2016. A human rights group superimposed pellet injuries similar to those inflicted on Kashmiris on the faces of popular Indian actors, famous people including Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and even Prime Minister Narendra Modi as a response, which went viral.[http://www.dawn.com/news/1273759 Who removes Kashmir posts on Facebook?]. Daily Dawn, July 28, 2016.Adamczyk, Ed. 2016. [http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2016/07/29/Kashmir-activist-campaign-shows-Facebook-CEO-Zuckerberg-shot-in-face/3761469811106/ Kashmir activist campaign shows Facebook CEO Zuckerberg shot in face]. United Press International, July 29, 2016.

Facebook has a policy to censor anything related to Kurdish opposition against Turkey, such as maps of Kurdistan, flags of Kurdish armed groups (such as PKK and YPG), and criticism of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of Turkey.{{cite web |title=Facebook's Kurdish problem? |url=http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/201308240040-0023000 |publisher=Al Jazeera |date=August 24, 2013 |access-date=June 18, 2017 |archive-date=July 3, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170703161954/http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/201308240040-0023000 |url-status=dead }}{{cite web |first=Christopher |last=Livesay |title=After battling ISIS, Kurds find new foe in Facebook |url=https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-10-07/after-battling-isis-kurds-find-new-foe-facebook |website=Public Radio International |publisher=WGBH Educational Foundation |date=October 7, 2015 |access-date=June 18, 2017}}

In October 2021, a secret blacklist of "dangerous individuals and organizations" maintained by Facebook was discovered by The Intercept, which revealed censorship in the MENA region was stricter than in USA.{{Citation|title=Facebook Dangerous Individuals and Organizations List (Reproduced Snapshot)|date=2021-10-12|url=https://theintercept.com/document/2021/10/12/facebook-dangerous-individuals-and-organizations-list-reproduced-snapshot/|publisher=The Intercept|language=en-US|access-date=2021-12-18}}{{Cite web|last=Biddle|first=Sam|date=2021-10-12|title=Revealed: Facebook's Secret Blacklist of "Dangerous Individuals and Organizations"|url=https://theintercept.com/2021/10/12/facebook-secret-blacklist-dangerous/|access-date=2021-12-18|website=The Intercept|language=en-US}} Critics and scholars have argued the blacklist and the guideline stifles free discussion, as well as enforcing an uneven enforcement of the rules.{{Citation|title=Facebook Praise, Support and Representation Moderation Guidelines (Reproduced Snapshot)|date=2021-10-12|url=https://theintercept.com/document/2021/10/12/facebook-praise-support-and-representation-moderation-guidelines-reproduced-snapshot/|publisher=The Intercept|language=en-US|access-date=2021-12-18}}

• Criticism of Facebook
• Censorship by Google
• Censorship by Apple
• Issues involving social networking services

{{Reflist}}

{{Censorship and websites}}

{{Facebook navbox}}

{{Internet censorship circumvention technologies}}

Facebook

Category:Facebook

Category:Facebook criticisms and controversies

Category:Censorship

Category:Prejudices