Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Social Networks

Facebook Allows Turkish Government To Set the Censorship Rules 121

Posted by timothy from the but-everyone-loves-the-king-of-thailand dept.
New submitter feylikurds writes: Facebook has been blocking and banning users for posting Kurdish or anti-Turkish material. Many screenshots exists of Facebook notifying people for such. You can insult any single historical figure that you like on Facebook except one: Turkey's founder Mustafa Kemal 'Ataturk'. However, he should not receive special treatment and be protected from criticism, but rather should be treated and examined like everyone else. In order to be accessible within Turkey, Facebook has allowed the repressive Turkish government to set the censorship rules for billions of their users all around the globe. Facebook censors Kurds on behalf of Turkey. To show the world how unjust this policy is, this group discusses Facebook's censorship policy as it relates to Kurds (Facebook account required) and how to get Facebook to change its unfair and discriminatory policy. Makes re-reading Hossein Derakhshan's piece worth the time.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Facebook Allows Turkish Government To Set the Censorship Rules More

Facebook Allows Turkish Government To Set the Censorship Rules

Comments Filter:

  • Slippery slope... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by QuietLagoon ( 813062 ) on Tuesday August 04, 2015 @01:03PM (#50249819)
    Once the infrastructure is in place for censorship, that infrastructure will be used.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Farcebook's greatest mistake, was to apply this censorship to people outside of Turkey.

    • Once the infrastructure is in place for censorship, that infrastructure will be used.

      Sadly the average person really doesn't care. They could probably just announce that they are selling all your data to North Korea, and then release some photos of the dog posing with Kim Jong Un and everyone would be fine with it.

    • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

      by jstuxx ( 4202009 )
      The infrastructure is already in use. Facebook is just a propaganda machine serving the NSA and US military. Just take a look at the cesspit Facebook is nowadays, I can't even spend a minute on Facebook without being bombarded with articles telling me how guilty I should be for being white and how a white girl not wanting to "go out" with a black is racism and how I should condemn it and blah blah blah, (I'm Eastern European btw). Facebook also promotes Islam, anti-Greek articles, anti-Russian articles, and

  • That's quite the write-up... I feel like I've just been to a rally.

  • Remember when the Internet was uncontrolled? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Shakrai ( 717556 ) on Tuesday August 04, 2015 @01:04PM (#50249827) Journal

    When USENET, IRC, and other mediums that were hard to censor were the rule rather than the exception? Now the "go to" places are all for profit enterprises, Facebook, Twitter, Google, et. al. They may profess to follow Western ideals, they may even actually believe in them, but when push comes to shove they'll always do what's necessary to enrich the bottom line.

    As an aside, I wonder why the EU is hesitant to consider admitting Turkey? Or why the United States insists on advocating in favor of such a course of action.

    • As an aside, I wonder why the EU is hesitant to consider admitting Turkey? Or why the United States insists on advocating in favor of such a course of action.

      I know it sounds crazy, but maybe it could be something about Russia? All our great empires hold strategic alliances that appear odd from a certain point of view, but this is their game.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Shakrai ( 717556 )

        The EU isn't a defensive alliance; that's what NATO is for and Turkey is already a NATO member. One that's keeping us from forming a coherent policy against ISIS, incidentally, since our natural allies in the region and only proven effective anti-ISIS force happen to be Turkey's sworn enemy.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by jstuxx ( 4202009 )
          The EU doesn't isn't going to have an coherent policy against ISIS. Everyone even the brain dead imbeciles know that ISIS is a US/EU/CIA/whatever creation.

        • Oh please! What the hell is a 'natural' ally?? ISIS is an American/Saudi creation, arising out of the 'moderate' rebels in whatever country the US is 'liberating' at the moment.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by siddesu ( 698447 )
      True, but the Internet was much smaller and less important then; it was, with few exceptions, a one-country, one-language affair and, luckily, that country wasn't Turkey, China, or the Soviet Union. That time is gone, however, now the Internet is big, international and outright dangerous to many a regime and government. So you're only going to see more of this.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Remember when the Internet was uncontrolled.

      Err; the Internet is still uncontrolled thank you very much; remember, Facebook != Internet; that is all.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Shakrai ( 717556 )

        remember, Facebook != Internet

        It is to many people, particularly those that came of age after the internet went mainstream, as well as those that are older and less technically adept.

        Like it or hate it, Facebook is the Internet to a lot of people. Try having a brick and mortar business these days without a presence on Facebook. There are countless people that will go looking for something on Facebook long before they think of a simple Google search. Why do you think Google has invested so much effort into social media despite their

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by jstuxx ( 4202009 )
        The Internet is controlled. Who is responsible for delivering the Internet: a bunch of ISP's, whilst every country has their own local ISP's the International fibre optic links are controlled by a handle of multinational US corporations. Who controls the assigning static IP addresses, i.e. the IP addresses which allow you to host your own web page, that's right a few corporations. Who controls domain name servers, a hand full of the same corporations which control IP addresses and the fibre optic links. No

    • I wonder why the EU is hesitant to consider admitting Turkey?

      EU so far does not have any dictatorships as members, and doesn't want to start. Also, Turkey still illegally occupies half of Cyprus. Those two alone are enough for a permaban without even looking at Turkey's financial governance etc.

      • EU so far does not have any dictatorships as members

        Hungary's getting pretty damn close. In fact, I'd say Hungary is closer to one than Turkey. Last election in Turkey, the ruling party didn't get a majority of the seats in parliament and had to form an alliance with a party it doesn't control. That's not something you generally see in a dictatorship.

    • The problem when we had USENET, IRC, etc. was that the users back then were FAR more technically adept than the average user now. There's just no way you're going to get Grandma to figure out how to use IRC or USENET so she can look at pictures from her grandkids, or write posts about Obama being a Muslim communist who's using FEMA to set up concontration camps. This is why Facebook is so successful: it's fairly easy for any moron to use. Also, its nature is different: it basically lets any moron set up

    • [Remember] when USENET, IRC, and other mediums that were hard to censor were the rule rather than the exception?

      I remember hating the geek's frustrating, jargon-ridden, clients for these services with the passion of a thousand suns. I used them only because they were serviceable over very low bandwidth connections.

      If the Internet looks different now, the geek has only himself to blame.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jstuxx ( 4202009 )
      Western ideals don't exist. The Western ideal is to silently censor whatever is not convenient for the political agenda and then pretend to follow some ideals when there is an attempt to censor propaganda in favor of their agenda.

    • When USENET, IRC, and other mediums that were hard to censor were the rule rather than the exception?

      They were not hard to censor; in fact, it would probably have been much easier, since the volumes were much lower. It was just that few realised the potential of this new technology; I remember well how, for years, my workplaces only had a very thin internat connection - in one place there was 1 PC, placed in the reception, connected via a modem, for the whole company to use. It was regarded as a curiosity that probably would fizzle out after a while.

      They may profess to follow Western ideals, they may even actually believe in them, but when push comes to shove they'll always do what's necessary to enrich the bottom line.

      Welcome to Capitalism, where the only valid measure of an

  • Facebook has allowed the repressive Turkish government to set the censorship rules for billions of their users all around the globe

    1.5 billion +/- is technically billions, but this statement is inflammatory.

  • Are they sure? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by IamTheRealMike ( 537420 ) on Tuesday August 04, 2015 @01:11PM (#50249887)

    I didn't actually see any evidence of Facebook censoring content because it's insulting to Ataturk on the linked page. The "evidence" appears to be a document that doesn't mention Facebook anywhere, but, let's take it as read that this really is a list of Facebook content abuse standards.

    Even with that assumption, things related to Turkey are not listed as always banned. They are under a section labelled "escalate", meaning, if it gets hot, send it to management.

    It may well be that Facebook has decided to enforce Turkish laws about this in order to get themselves unbanned there. But it may also be that upper management just wants more precise control over this hot potato. Once I see a clear message from Facebook saying a group was suspended for violating Turkish censorship laws, then I'll agree.

  • Facebook will do what is best for its stock price. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Snufu ( 1049644 ) on Tuesday August 04, 2015 @01:15PM (#50249931)

    Period.

  • Tragically (Score:4, Insightful)

    by loonycyborg ( 1262242 ) on Tuesday August 04, 2015 @01:24PM (#50250013)
    I didn't read the link because it requires a facebook account which I don't have and never will have. Maybe it's mirrored in free access somewhere?

    • Re:Tragically (Score:4, Informative)

      by darniil ( 793468 ) on Tuesday August 04, 2015 @01:44PM (#50250143)

      I'll help out.

      Here's the group description:

      If you have been blocked or banned from FB for posting Kurdish or anti-Turkish material, please screenshot the image that FB sent when notifying you and post it here (you can black out your name if you want).

      This group is solely for material dealing with how FB censors Kurds on behalf of Turkey and to show the world how unjust this policy is. Posts are also welcome that discuss FB censorship policy as it relates to Kurds, and discussions on how to get FB to change this unfair and discriminatory policy.

      The most recent post after that is someone saying, "My submission is on the frontpage of one of the largest sites on the Internet!", followed by a link to this /. story.

      It seems like slightly more than half of the posts in that group are people complaining about what's alleged in this article, and slightly less than half are people actually posting screenshots of FB moderation.

      • Thank you.
      • Just curious but how do you post such pictures to a group which requires a Facebook login if you have been blocked or banned from Facebook?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by darniil ( 793468 )

          I imagine you can always just make a new account. It's not like email addresses are in short supply, or that a person is limited to one Facebook account per lifetime.

          Sometimes the bans or blocks may be at the post-level, rather than the account-level. That would allow the account with the "sanctioned" content to continue to post in other areas.

  • Facebook overlords (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I, for one, welcome our free speech abolishing, profit driven facebook overlords!

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Well, if Facebook is provably censoring outside of Turkey, instead of inside of Turkey to comply with Turkish laws ... then, yes, this is a big deal.

      I see no evidence they are, but if Facebook starts applying this censorship globally then this is a scary precedent. Because next they'll ban blasphemy, ban criticizing the Thai PM, and basically start banning anything which is banned anywhere.

      Of course, the problem is there is nothing to support this except the group which claims it is true.

      But if it is true,

      • They've *always* applied US censorship rules worldwide. Now they just added a few more.

        For example: breastfeeding pictures, nudes in paintings of classical masters, your own naked photo's - all banned. None of it illegal in the EU. So don't complain when the chickens come home to roost - censorship was built in from the start.

  • The 17-page manual outlines especially strict policies when it comes to Turkey, its founder Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the Kurds, and imprisoned Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan. No other country enjoys such censorship privileges. Gawker.com recently posted the document leaked by a former employee of oDesk, the firm contracted to police the content shared by Facebook users. Once a specific post is reported by a Facebook user, moderators are instructed to “confirm,” “unconfirm,” “esc

  • Ataturk was a punk (Score:3)

    by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Tuesday August 04, 2015 @02:08PM (#50250331) Journal

    I was only in Istanbul once, and only long enough to have dinner, fall asleep and run to the airport. But my Serbian monther-in-law has some very strong opinions about Turks. She's usually such a sweet little old lady, but don't get her started on the Turks. I mean, the Ottoman Empire was gone before she was born, but damn, she's still mad about something.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Tough Love ( 215404 )

      The Turks have always been big on genocide and what is currently going on in southeast Turkey pretty much continues the tradition (see burning forests to depopulate villages - can you tell the difference between that an ethnic cleansing?)

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by jstuxx ( 4202009 )
      African colonialism and US slavery were gone before most of todays black kids were born however they still go on and on about colonialism and justify for everything that is wrong in their lives so why shouldn't Serbian people have the same attitude towards Turks I mean nobody would dare say Black people shouldn't be pissed about Colonialism. Ooops this comment is likely to get censored due to "racism" but then again nobody will care, "OMG CENSORSHIP ON SLASHDOT. Racism ohh okay no problem then."

      • I mean nobody would dare say Black people shouldn't be pissed about Colonialism. Ooops this comment is likely to get censored due to "racism" but then again nobody will care, "OMG CENSORSHIP ON SLASHDOT. Racism ohh okay no problem then."

        Geez, man. What are you so upset about? You better take care you don't have a stroke worrying about all that.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by jstuxx ( 4202009 )
          Nothing didn't you get the irony? The above comment was ridiculing Serbs for hating Turks however change the perspective a little, replace Serbs with Black people and Turks with White people and Ottoman empire with colonialism and suddenly it is now a big serious issue unlike the joke above, his comment would be deleted and we wouldn't even care, in-fact all of us would be in full support suddenly forgetting our anti-censorship stance whereas if a comment insulting Ataturk or a comment against the Chinese g

          • I was being ironic too.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by KGIII ( 973947 )

            Comments do not get deleted here. Well, unless they are that one comment - do not threaten the president and you should be all set. You can say anything you want. There is no censorship here. We'd notice and we would be very, very angry. To see all comments browse at -1.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by CompMD ( 522020 )

      I'm of Greek descent, and when my grandmother developed Alzheimer's about 18 years ago, we found that she would take knives from the kitchen and hide them in her bedroom and in her purse. We put them all back and this happened a few times before we found her purse just full of knives. When we confronted her about it, she scowled and said she needed them in case any Turks came by. Thankfully she never hurt herself or anyone else. But yeah man, I get where you're coming from.

    • Ataturk was certainly no saint by Western standards, but he did manage to create a secular country out of the ruins of the Ottoman Empire.

  • Nothing to do with Facebook policy (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Everything to do with US foreign policy.

    Turkey is _important_, and they get away with plenty of things to do with the kurdish independence movement simply because they are important.

    This will not be something Facebook chose to do lightly; it'll have been diplomatic-level pressure and then very serious state department pressure.

    This bullshit has little to do with Facebook or the internet.

  • My attempt to get myself censored or banned was unsuccessful: https://www.facebook.com/wogsl... [facebook.com]

    • My attempt to get myself censored or banned was unsuccessful: https://www.facebook.com/wogsl... [facebook.com]

      At work so I am not going to follow your link but I have noticed a double standard if you identify as a democrat, leftist or a member of the LGBT community. They allow those people to say a bunch of hateful bigoted things about Jews and Christians. Every report, no matter how blatant, receives a "we found that it does not violate the community standards blah blah blah". But if I were to call a gay person a coward for hiding behind a fake community page to attack christians on christian stories, I get banned

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by jstuxx ( 4202009 )
        Glad I'm not the only one who sees it for what it is. Black racists can post as much hate speech as they want and its always excused with history, colonialism, slavery and always it's justified because Black people are somehow more discriminated than white people in America even though the president of the USA is Black and Blacks have largely equal rights as white people, in-fact Blacks are more equal than whites, It's always excused with "that's not really racism" which translate only white people can be r

      • There's plenty of Christians in this country who seem to think that not allowing them to discriminate against non-Christians and not allowing them to tailor the laws according to their personal preference is hateful and bigoted. I'm not sure how many of them there are (I don't know any) but they exist and are pretty loud. Therefore, I don't accept a Christian's claim that somebody is maligning them. I like to see what the people are saying before passing judgment.

        Christians are not alone in their over

  • Wait a sec, even Mohammed? (Score:3)

    by foreverdisillusioned ( 763799 ) on Tuesday August 04, 2015 @03:13PM (#50250765) Journal

    You can insult any single historical figure that you like on Facebook except one: Turkey's founder Mustafa Kemal 'Ataturk'

    I would think that Turkey has something to say about Mohammed as well, considering they seized copies of Charlie Hebdo's survival issue due to the horribly, horribly offensive image of a crying prophet holding up a sign saying "All is Forgiven". (Aside: This really goes to show how deluded a lot of people are on these issues. If your scale is calibrated such that Turkey is deemed "secular" then a place like Texas is going to come out as "ultra-secular / atheistic")

    Also, is this censorship happening on only Turkey's localized Facebook or is it on English Facebook as well? TFS doesn't make this clear, and although it's impossible to say it without coming off as a little smug ("I don't own a TV!"), I don't actually have a Facebook account so I can't read TFA.

  • If Facebook is so willing to bend completely to the Turkish government's demands for censorship, I wonder why, then, it remains banned in China - being that the key (publicly accepted) reason circled around censorship.

    I know that the Chinese government isn't so keen on allowing Facebook to operate in China at all, given that they are in support of local competitors, but in order to legitimately prevent Facebook from competing if they wanted to - they'd need to essentially abide by the same rules as the loca

  • Anyone who uses facebook will notice how it picks and chooses what to show you. Even if you jump through their overly complicated grouping methods, it will only limit what to show you. The only way to get a good stream is to view each person/group independently, which is over kill. You cant add secret groups to lists, so you have to view each secret group directly. RSS feeds no longer work, and stories are limited to 20 at a time.

    They even scan for posts that relate to what you post, including categori

    • Lets not kid ourselves, the hate for anything non-progressive, left leaning gets a hammer on facebook.

      Bullshit. The hate for anything non-centrist is what you mean. I've posted truly left-of-left stuff on fb and had it disappear, or the URL content (and preview) get stripped but the post remains so it looks like I'm just ranting and frothing about nothing, so before I stopped sharing important things on fb I started putting the URLs into my text every time. And I'd go look and the website would still be there, and there would be no notices from fb about canning my content, just stripped. Stuff I'd posted be

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by jstuxx ( 4202009 )
      What's worse Facebook does not outright censor all hate speech for example it permits and outright pushes hate speech coming from Black racists, Feminists, gay men to your newsfeed, it's a trend everywhere and its probably why Facebook even exists and makes money. Ask yourself why else would a costly service allowing people to store HUGE amounts of photos, each photo is a couple of Megabytes, each person who actively uses Facebook has Gigabytes worth of photos, now total it all up it probably numbers in the
  • I don't understand how this creates such an outcry yet censoring posts which are perceived to be racist (racism is only considered such if the perpetrators white and the victim is not white) is not a problem in fact everyone supports the banning of "hate speech" yet this Turkish thing has everyone screaming censorship.

  • This is pretty much old news, going back to the leaked document that gawker got in 2012 (http://gawker.com/5885714/inside-facebooks-outsourced-anti-porn-and-gore-brigade-where-camel-toes-are-more-offensive-than-crushed-heads).

    What I can't tell for sure, and as someone not particularly affiliated with the Kurdish or Turkish causes, haven't experienced directly, is Facebook applying all of these standards (e.g. denigration of Ataturk) to all Facebook users, or does it only affect users from Turkey?

    That is, if

  • They're testing this set of censorship techniques in case they are one day required to use them in the US and Europe.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Close