Facebook permits Holocaust denial but not half a breast

I have been banned from Facebook for three days for displaying the Moses und Aron image below.

Facebook’s founded Mark Zuckerberg said recently he would not remove Holocaust deniers from his platform, because some are not ‘intentionally getting it wrong.’

To deny the worst crime in history is unspeakable. To encourage that denial is worse.

But the worst of all, in Zuckerberg’s weird world, is to show half of a bare bosom in a relevant news context.

Slipped Disc, fortunately, has become much less dependent on Facebook and can publish happily without it.

However, if our 1.6 million readers feel as I do about Zuckerberg’s moral criminality and personal hypocrisy, I would suggest – no, urge – that you copy some of our posts onto your Facebook home pages in the next couple of days as an act of protest.

Thank you.

share this

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on google
  • It is much more serious. I can discern 1½ bare bosom in the picture. Does it mean that NL would be banned 4½ days instead?

    By the way: who needs Facebook?

    • Hear hear! I have *never* utilised the aforementioned social-networking site, and have no plans to do so. I refuse to permit a big American multi-national, acting in cahoots with biased political think-tanks and lobbyists (just look at the affiliations of the people involved in the so-called “fake news” filtering taskforces), to dictate what news I should receive, what data can be disseminated, and how I can interact with others (most of whom are *not* my “friends” — I refuse to allow the term to be diluted to mean “acquaintances”). Social-networking sites attempt to avoid liability for their members’ activity (e.g.: copyright infringement) thereon by saying they are only a platform, yet attempt to monetise their members’ activity by controlling and censoring it (sometimes crudely) when it suits their bottom line.

      As for Zuckerberg, he is a twisted pervert — did you know that an early incarnation of his social-networking site invited Harvard students to “rate” female students based on photographs which Zuckerberg had obtained illegally by hacking Harvard’s servers? Perhaps his present prudishness is a feeble attempt at virtue-signalling to compensate for that despicable crime?

  • ‘However, if our 1.6 million readers feel as I do about Zuckerberg’s moral criminality and personal hypocrisy, I would suggest – no, urge – that you copy some of our posts onto your Facebook home pages in the next couple of days as an act of protest.’

    Visitors low over the past month? 😉

  • The holocaust deniers generate substantial traffic which is part of the business model of getting eyeballs to show ads to.

    Facebook’s stock price dropped 20% last week on a weak revenue report. Throwing out the traffic generators won’t be happening soon.

    • ==The holocaust deniers generate substantial traffic which is part of the business model of getting eyeballs to show ads to.

      I’m afraid that Robert has explained it perfectly.

  • Something to do with the comparative ease of spotting the offending item? You wouldn’t expect Facebook’s censors to be educated enough to understand Holocaust denial, but they recognise a boob when they see one.

  • Very sorry, but anyone who even signs up to Farcebook using their real name, never mind actually running a business from it, deserves all they get.

  • Facebook is for nosey people with nothing else to do. I remember way back when, when it was just a simple little website with a few thousand people on it with no profile pictures.

    You can bet your bottom dollar somebody’s trying to sell, shill something via social media.

    The owner’s mantra was to “connect people.”

    People want to disconnect. They have simply had enough.

    Enough of these para-sites.

  • >