How does not one of their well paid engineers flag that this will obviously happen when implementing these features?
All of this content control will be an interesting social experiment. I would like to see a clear hypothesis though, and ways we can judge whether this is a success or failure.
(I'm using the term "content control" to mean something that kind of feels like censorship but not done with laws.)
Bets on what the content was that got foliohd banned?
His portfolio website arguably competes with Facebook, where artists sometimes have pages for their work. I doubt this case is a deliberate attempt to strangle a competitor in the crib (although I'm sure this does happen), but if Facebook were actually scared of anti-trust enforcement I think their whole blocking process would be a little less draconian.
If Hillary had won none of this would have been a problem. No claims of “election interference”, no one would have accused Facebook of being “used to manipulate the voters”. Life would have been happy for Facebook, Twitter and other entities.
It seems to me that this guy is unaware of the hundreds of other people who get blocked on Facebook platforms daily for years now. Otherwise he'd have already drawn the conclusion to leave all those platforms instead of begging Facebook to care. Because they obviously don't.
Literally anything Facebook does will have far reaching consequences. Edit: What I mean to say is that maybe we could choose a better title.
To me, this just shows why it's important to build communication channels that you own (e.g. podcast, mailing list, etc) if you want to have unimpeded access to your audience. Today it's a censorship thing, tomorrow it'll be somebody deciding to erect a toll booth between you and your followers. Social platforms should just be the cherry on top of your foundational communications strategy.