4 ms·

How does FB decide which disasters qualify for the safety check and which do not?

• tomschlick 11y ago
  As described in a post by Zuckerberg, before the Paris attack it was only activated for natural disasters. Paris was the first time it was activated for human disasters and they will be doing it more in the future.
  • anandr2013 11y ago
    I think the post had a bit of a frantic working backwards and managing PR tinge to it. A cyclone/tsunami also takes place over an extended period of time, and is very similar to a human disaster. In any case, it is a really nice feature and the fact that they will start using it for more disasters is undoubtedly a good thing.
  • omginternets 11y ago
    Respectfully, that doesn't answer the question. What is the current policy for determining use?
    • rmc 11y ago
      The real reason, which they probably can't say, is how much media attention it gets in the USA.
      • omginternets 11y ago
        I'm entertaining the notion that this is a way to justify some new privacy-invading feature. I'd love to be wrong, and I'm open to a statement from a FB employee, if such a thing were possible.
        • throwaway_1002 11y ago
          "Never let a good crisis go to waste."
        • eggie 11y ago
          Or perhaps it motivates the idea that if you do not use facebook you can never be completely "safe".
      • jonesb6 11y ago
        Why was this down-voted? Doesn't it have a high chance of stimulating meaningful discussion?
    • cortesoft 11y ago
      Probably "If the people in charge of running it decide it is worthy"