Perhaps his point is not that they should take down the denier groups but instead let back in the breast feeding pictures. Clearly the tone of the article does

Perhaps his point is not that they should take down the denier groups but instead let back in the breast feeding pictures. Clearly the tone of the article doesn't make that appear to be the case, but Arrington is indeed correct in pointing out a discrepancy here. I find it funny that people champion Facebook in the comments for taking such a "high ground", when clearly they are not doing so in the case of breast feeding images. Facebook is censoring its content, albeit making some controversial choices, but censoring all the same. If free speech is free speech, then the images should be allowed back on. There exists no reasonable argument for removing them outside of "they're offensive to X group", and that is the exact same argument being made about the denier situation. I think its great that Facebook has relatively pro free speech attitudes, but let's not kid ourselves here: every choice about what stays on and what doesn't is purely based on marketing. In this country we have a problem with nudity, so the breast feeding pictures are out. If enough people got angry about the denier groups, I guarantee those would be taken out as well. At the end of the day, its absolutely true that these choices are a function of cowardice: not wanting to upset certain demographics that would leave their service.