That's a fairly deceptive title and set of claims. They're making it sound like facebook is targeting activists. (How dare they not be able to promote their mes

That's a fairly deceptive title and set of claims. They're making it sound like facebook is targeting activists. (How dare they not be able to promote their message) > At a time when Facebook is under the microscope for failing to stop harassment and the spread of fake news, it > Doing nothing to stop hateful messages That's how moderation works. It resolves the problem after it happens. You have to be responsible for addressing the problem as it happens. Automated moderation does nothing to stop the second quote. You can't just ban particular words because there are places where they will legitimately be used. You'll get a claim from the otherside saying that it's blatent censorship. (As is the case with the confederate dream catcher in the article). > “And finally, facebook decided to take action,” she wrote in a blog post. “What did they do? Did they suspend any of the people who threatened me? No. … They suspended me for three days for posting screenshots of the abuse they have refused to do anything about.” How does she know this? If I'm not mistaken she won't get informed if they get suspended.