About Me

Name: Alexander Koby
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 

Facebook Explains "McCain/Palin '08" Fan Page Removal

Friends,

(I'm starting to sound like Joe Lieberman)

When John McCain announced Sarah Palin as his running mate, I quickly created a "McCain/Palin '08" Group to begin gathering support for the ticket. Following Facebook's advice, it was suggested that I create a Fan Page as well, which would allow more options and features for users. So, I focused my efforts on promoting the "McCain/Palin '08" Fan Page instead.

As of Sept. 16, the "McCain/Palin '08" Fan Page, which had attracted over 200,000 supporters, was taken down by Facebook. No warning was given, no explanation was sent to its members; the Page simply disappeared. I received a notice informing me that I or the Page had violated one or more of these generic terms of use.

It read:

Warning - Please Read This!

You created a Page that has violated our Terms of Use, and this Page has been removed. Facebook Pages are special profiles used solely for commercial, political, or charitable purposes. Among other things, Pages that are hateful, threatening, or obscene are not allowed. We also take down Pages that attack an individual or group, or that are set up by an unauthorized individual. Continued misuse of Facebook's features could result in your account being disabled.
 
Being unsure of which generic guideline Facebook was referring to, I requesting a more specific answer clarifying the exact term they felt was broken. I received a reply from Facebook stating, in summary, that I (Alexander Koby) am not an "authorized representative" of the individual or group being promoted and thereby had violated Facebook's terms of use.
 
The entire E-mail reads:
Hi Alexander,

Per our Terms of Use, Facebook Pages may only be set up by an authorized representative of the entity or individual that is the subject of the Facebook Page. If a Page is created by an unauthorized individual, this Page may be removed. If an authorized representative requests it, the fans of an unofficial Page may be moved over to the official Page before it is removed. Because we respect the privacy of all users, I'm not able to give you any specific information about another user's removed Page. Please note, however, that the official, authorized Pages for John McCain and Sarah Palin are still available on the site.

Our view is that Facebook should not play the arbiter of any discussion that occurs through our site. We apply this view to any political discourse through any of our products, including Facebook Pages and Ads. By censoring certain messages while allowing others, we would risk damaging the very discussion that we designed our products to create. We will never remove a Page in order to censor the content or promote a differing opinion.

We do take down Pages that attack an individual or group or that promote or glorify violence, intolerance, racism or discrimination.

If you have any questions or concerns, you can visit the Terms Applicable to Facebook Pages at http://www.facebook.com/terms_pages.php.

Thanks for contacting Facebook,

Claire
Customer Operations
Facebook
The explanation keeps reverting back to threats and hate speech, none of which were endorsed or promoted by the Page. It was a "Fan Page," hence calling for support of something positive. On the other hand, we all know that people are going to make comments and start verbal fights; that's a given. It then falls to the administrator and community members alike to remove or report these unsavory postings, though some things are undoubtedly bound to slip through the cracks.

Considering the Page developed a substantial fan base, I would like to see it reactivated. However, since Facebook allows me no means of contacting either the John McCain or Sarah Palin Fan Page Admins directly to request authorization, I have made a few postings and replied to Facebook seeking further assistance instead.

Perhaps one of the McCain staffers will write me a permission slip.

Nevertheless, I am surprised at how hastily this Page was taken down, barely lasting 2 weeks. We have all seen highly obnoxious Groups on Facebook, and for as often as you may report them for being offensive, they are rarely taken down, if ever.

Case in point: A few years back, some coworkers created a Group mocking a silly comment another had made. It was all in good fun and no one was "offended" by it, not even the commenter who was a member. However, to the unsuspecting passerby, it could have been interpreted as hateful or cruel. As time passed, the group dwindled and a fickle third-part became the Admin. I left the group too, but for some reason, my name was in the description of this Group and every time you ran a search for me on Facebook, this Group popped up. Since the new Admin was unresponsive, it took me 2 years of reporting and letter writing before Facebook finally acted in taking the Group down. Hardly a consistent policy.

In the meantime, the "McCain/Palin '08" Group seems to violate no terms and has been left alone.

# # #

(a.k. 09.20.08)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Facebook: "Change" simply for "Change Sake"

So, this is the future of Facebook? My first question is, "Seriously?" Followed by, "Will this 'new' layout become the 'only' layout?" After being hyped for so long, I was truly expecting something with flair, pizzazz, and dare I say -- personality. The layout feels more awkward than Vista, and colder than the CIA mainframe -- this, black and blue scatter plot. Change for change sake is not the same as innovation.

For example, why did the developers think that restacking birthdays is more user-friendly? Shouldn't "Today" and "Tomorrow" remain above a person's name? Next, is it just me or did the Font get smaller again? Sheesh, I need everyday glasses, reading glasses and now -- Facebook glasses... Actually the Font is the same, however, there's just more white-space than ever before; makeing the site feel overly wordy in some places and barren in others. The old version in its compact state was cleaner, more to the point -- despite the clutter of Applications.

I never liked Mini-Feed to begin with, but now, it has been jumbled with Wall posts. Despite being separated with silver backgrounds, having to sift through every single action or update, or continually having to click the "Posts by Others" filter, is tedious.

Why have all Friends been dumped into one grouping? This seems to defeat the purpose of being in a specific network or selecting a primary network. The ability to select "Top Friends" isn't exactly new, but it's a handy feature. Though, I do like having the ability to hide the "Friends in Other Networks" list. It also seems that we no longer have the ability to rearrange boxes or collapse them, thus adding to the "never-ending scroll." From here, the list just goes on, and on, and onward still...

In summary, the Facebook techies need to go back to the drawing board and start collaborating with those trendy right-brained Apple artists and hopefully roll out with a more eye-pleasing skin next quarter.

In the meantime -- Stick with the classics, stick with what works.

# # #
(a.k. 08.05.08)
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »