I disagree, Signal claimed that their ads were rejected. Yet the images provided show that for the campaign in question there were no rejected ads. They need to

I disagree, Signal claimed that their ads were rejected. Yet the images provided show that for the campaign in question there were no rejected ads. They need to provide something a little more accurate to argue that. My argument is based on the fact that Signal have come out with an official blog post about it, because they believe that Facebook have rejected their ads and have disabled their account because of the campaign. They have not said that Facebooks UI is confusing and they’re unable to figure out how to unblock their account, they have made the assumption that the campaign was rejected because and I quote “Facebook is more than willing to sell visibility into people’s lives, unless it’s to tell people about how their data is being used. Being transparent about how ads use people’s data is apparently enough to get banned; in Facebook’s world, the only acceptable usage is to hide what you’re doing from your audience.”. This is a massive call to make and is a big overstep in judgement without much to substantiate your claim (based on the images). Even if it was due to Facebook’s confusing UI, I think it is irresponsible for Signal to simply assume this is what Facebook have done and why. If it has come down to what you say it has, it does not look good for Signal.