[HN Gopher] Leaked Meta data reveals campaign to remove pro-Pale...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Leaked Meta data reveals campaign to remove pro-Palestine posts
        
       Author : jbegley
       Score  : 541 points
       Date   : 2025-04-11 16:24 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.dropsitenews.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.dropsitenews.com)
        
       | Qem wrote:
       | Archived version:
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20250411170102/https://www.drops...
        
       | MPSFounder wrote:
       | Everyone knew this. That is part of why our gov pushes so hard
       | for the acquisition of TikTok. Israel is the leading orchestrator
       | of propaganda alongside Russia, which you can easily see through
       | their IDF videos aimed at teenagers. Strip this issue of any
       | political and religious underpinning. It is based on colonization
       | and apartheid, where one country is much more powerful than the
       | other (and given it is an ethnostate, it is backed by the United
       | States, where the artistocracy is overwhelmingly Jewish). The end
       | result is "free speech" is no free speech indeed. Additionally,
       | Mark is not particularly religious, although his mother very much
       | is. I am assuming being pro-Israel is a tenet of their faith.
       | Obviously Palestin-e will never be able to orchestrate this (they
       | lack a functioning government). More interesting than this
       | though, there are bot farms (which we located to be within 20
       | miles of Tel Aviv) that actively disparaged Harris during her
       | campaign, and that doxed American citizens who had any pro-
       | Palestine posts. Canary Mission is an example, it is a front for
       | IDF militants to target Americans that are critical of Israel.
       | Yet there are traitors among us that favor Israel over the rights
       | of Americans (the majority of the protestors doxxed are Jewish
       | and white by the way, last time I checked). It is very
       | interesting how these farms operate (IDF soldiers get 2 hours out
       | of 10 of their service to sit behind accounts and push for pro-
       | Israel propaganda. Some of it is benign, mostly pretending to be
       | other people and swarming comments. Sometimes it is escalated to
       | doxing and stalking individuals, blacklisting them and in the
       | extremes, getting them fired like those Ivy League deans that
       | stood for free speech. You can usually see it in Reddit posts,
       | where a bulk of them are made within 1 hour of each other).
        
         | robertoandred wrote:
         | A country where 20% of the population is Muslim is hardly a
         | Jewish ethnostate.
        
           | cool_dude85 wrote:
           | Is it possible for a country where 80% of the population is
           | black to be a white ethnostate?
        
             | swarnie wrote:
             | Not since about 1991
        
               | Cyph0n wrote:
               | That flew right above your head mate.
        
           | MPSFounder wrote:
           | The leadership is Jewish. You can argue America in the early
           | 1900s during Jim Crow was not technically segregated and
           | disenfranchised. Looking at facts without context is very
           | misleading. The leadership themselves described their
           | neighbors as animals. It is a nation based on dehumanization
           | for the establishment of a religious ethnostate (hence the
           | law of return aimed at Jews and not Muslim or Christian arabs
           | for instance). Making any excuse on behalf of Israel is
           | frankly mind-boggling. It is a tale of the slave feeding his
           | master. Although many Americans stood for South African
           | apartheid, so it comes as no surprise when fed propaganda,
           | most of us will choose what to believe. Part of me wishes we
           | exposed more of those Israeli farms etc, but it will come at
           | a dear price if you do so (remember Congress is controlled by
           | AIPAC, and they will throw the book at you if you do)
        
             | robertoandred wrote:
             | > The leadership is Jewish
             | 
             | Might want to tell them that https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik
             | i/List_of_Arab_members_of_the_...
        
               | MPSFounder wrote:
               | A clown can always be put in charge for propaganda
               | purposes. The facts remain
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return
               | 
               | I know an American Christian family of Palestinian origin
               | that proved their home had been in the outskirts of
               | Nazareth (5 generations back, with concrete proof) that
               | were denied a visit to Israel because they are not
               | Jewish. It is shameful and repugnant. While anyone can
               | visit Israel in theory, the gov will deny you entry if
               | there is connection to the land that precedes Israeli
               | settlements. And of course, the law of return is
               | exclusively for Jewish people
        
               | robertoandred wrote:
               | > there are no Arabs in Israeli leadership!
               | 
               | > there are
               | 
               | > yeah but they're clowns!
               | 
               | What's the real propaganda here?
        
               | TimorousBestie wrote:
               | This serves to demonstrate that "Arabs" residing in
               | Israel (with all the complexities of Israeli residency
               | omitted for the sake of time) are relatively
               | underrepresented in the Knesset.
               | 
               | You've shown less than 10% of the Knesset is "Arab" (for
               | Israel's peculiar definition of "Arab"), whereas 20+% of
               | the population is.
        
           | ahoy wrote:
           | Was apartheid South Africa not an ethnostate then? Was the US
           | south during slavery not an ethnostate?
           | 
           | I almost wonder if your comment itself is Israeli propaganda.
        
             | dang wrote:
             | Both comments that you posted to this thread so far have
             | broken the site guidelines. Can you please review
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stop
             | doing that?
             | 
             | You're welcome to make your substantive points
             | thoughtfully, but it's not ok to attack others (for
             | example).
             | 
             | This is really important, because the impact of doing this
             | evokes worse from others in a fruit-of-the-poisoned-tree
             | sort of way. It's not a surprise that your comment here
             | formed the root of such a terrible subthread with so many
             | comments breaking the site guidelines at least as badly.
        
               | ahoy wrote:
               | The site guidelines are fairly poorly written if they
               | allow pro-genocide trolls but not pushback
        
         | donjoe0 wrote:
         | *leading orchestrator of propaganda alongside the US, which has
         | the most effective propaganda machine in the history of the
         | world, more effective even than its actual military
         | 
         | All you need is to check the miles-long list of antidemocratic
         | coups d'etat organized by - or with the critical support of -
         | the US, and what the press or the public thought at the time if
         | you asked them if the US was doing that.
        
           | maujun wrote:
           | You seem to be indicating that the US actions were bad.
           | 
           | But after those actions, that's what many people wanted after
           | simply reading/listening to some words.
           | 
           | Even if you say what the US is disseminating is not "true"
           | (or misleading), it is debatable that truth matters more than
           | the people's "preferences".
           | 
           | And it's debatable that other country's preferences matter
           | more than the US people's. What's wrong with the US spreading
           | it's view of morality (such as human rights)?
           | 
           | The US is the greatest country in the world. I learned that
           | in school and don't need to worry about whether it's true.
           | Now and when the time comes, I will be a good citizen.
        
         | anovick wrote:
         | You speak about others using bots, yet your post reads entirely
         | as bot-made.
         | 
         | You speak about others using propaganda, yet your
         | unsubstantiated claims mixed with keywords that evoke strong
         | emotions, are exactly the kind used for propaganda.
        
           | MPSFounder wrote:
           | I am not a bot. In fact I welcome ideas to take them down. I
           | am just not owned by Israel and do not disseminate their
           | propaganda, and I frankly reject their influence on our
           | politics. I see them as enemies of the United States, because
           | their morals are very much not aligned with ours as far as I
           | am concerned. Your other comments opposing blocking Israel
           | tells me you are Israeli. I understand you could be victim of
           | their propaganda too (visit the Ghaza strip. I am sure the
           | IDF will provide you protection. Or fly a drone over it to
           | see the famine Israel is responsible for). I would urge you
           | to oppose your gov interfering in American politics. We do
           | not take lightly to foreign interference :)
        
       | ethbr1 wrote:
       | >> _The data show that Meta has complied with 94% of takedown
       | requests issued by Israel since October 7, 2023._
       | 
       | Nice to see Zuckerberg taking free speech as seriously as he
       | claims.
        
         | natch wrote:
         | Sarcasm noted. Perhaps society may not be able to reach your
         | ideal form of free speech as long as we have limitations on
         | incitement-type hate speech that promotes terrorism.+
         | 
         | +and _actual_ genocide.
        
           | Cyph0n wrote:
           | Tell me: how do you define "actual" genocide when the
           | goalposts keep moving and the top courts responsible for
           | prosecuting genocide keep getting ignored and (in the case of
           | ICC) sanctioned?
           | 
           | At this point, anyone with even an ounce of awareness &
           | empathy should realize that international law is dead until
           | further notice.
        
             | dingnuts wrote:
             | actual genocide is what has happened to the Jewish
             | population in every country in their native homeland -- the
             | middle east -- except Israel. Pick an islamist country, any
             | of the ones in the area but especially the governments
             | backed by Iran, and you will see a great example of ethnic
             | cleansing and genocide.
             | 
             | You will also understand then, that the Jews defending
             | their ninety mile strip by the sea are actually in their
             | last stand in a fight for survival stretching back 1000
             | years
             | 
             | so tell me: what is genocide? what is Holocaust? How many
             | Jews still live in Arabia? Iraq? Iran? These are their
             | indigenous homelands.
             | 
             | What is genocide?
        
               | skyyler wrote:
               | >You will also understand then, that the Jews defending
               | their ninety mile strip by the sea are actually in their
               | last stand in a fight for survival stretching back 1000
               | years
               | 
               | It's really hard to keep this kind of rhetoric going when
               | we have the internet showing us videos of hospitals being
               | bombed. That's not defense.
        
             | natch wrote:
             | Good question, but also, study some history. This did not
             | start in 1948, nor in that century even.
        
         | seydor wrote:
         | I m not sure he ever claimed that
        
           | pmastela wrote:
           | I recall he made changes at the beginning of the year
           | specifically because "it's time to get back to our roots
           | around free expression."
           | 
           | Full transcript of his remarks can be found here:
           | https://www.techpolicy.press/transcript-mark-zuckerberg-
           | anno...
        
       | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
       | What if I don't care to see pro-Palestinian posts?
        
         | rtkwe wrote:
         | Ok don't follow those people then? Or mute their posts from
         | your timeline? There are tools you can use to take
         | responsibility for your own feed. My tool of choice is to just
         | never scroll on the main feed on the rare times I do go to FB
         | at all because the feed is 90% engagement slop from super safe
         | pages I don't follow. Either way your personal preferences
         | don't justify the mass suppression.
        
           | hackerknew wrote:
           | I don't follow any of those people. But, I literally get ads
           | for Palestinian causes on facebook from fake charities.
        
         | cool_dude85 wrote:
         | Click downvote, or don't read them, or since this is FB put the
         | little angry face emoji on it. Just don't have a state
         | apparatus dedicated to whining to the mods to please delete
         | this post!
        
         | zombiwoof wrote:
         | That's like following the NFL but complaining if the Cowboys
         | are discussed too much.
        
         | DAGdug wrote:
         | If everything that anyone cared to not see was censored,
         | there'd be no content on the internet. Also, not smart to
         | conflate (lack of) personalization with government-induced
         | content moderation.
        
       | googlryas wrote:
       | I'd like to see examples of actual posts that were taken down,
       | rather than talk of the quantity, or who filed the reports.
        
         | mef51 wrote:
         | The HRW report[1] goes into details, at least on the 1050
         | takedowns they documented
         | 
         | > A Human Rights Watch (HRW) report investigating Meta's
         | moderation of pro-Palestine content post-October 7th found
         | that, of 1,050 posts HRW documented as taken-down or suppressed
         | on Facebook or Instagram, 1,049 involved peaceful content in
         | support of Palestine, while just one post was content in
         | support of Israel."
         | 
         | [1] https://www.hrw.org/report/2023/12/21/metas-broken-
         | promises/...
        
           | cypherpunks01 wrote:
           | > Human Rights Watch also found repeated inaccurate
           | application of the "adult nudity and sexual activity" policy
           | for content related to Palestine. In every one of the cases,
           | we reviewed where this policy was invoked, the content
           | included images of dead Palestinians over ruins in Gaza that
           | were clothed, not naked. For example, multiple users reported
           | their Instagram stories being removed under this policy when
           | they posted the same image of a Palestinian father in Gaza
           | who was killed while he was holding his clothed daughter, who
           | was also killed.
           | 
           | > While "hate speech," "bullying and harassment," and
           | "violence and incitement" policies[74] were less commonly
           | invoked in the cases Human Rights Watch documented, the
           | handful of cases where they were applied stood out as
           | erroneous. For example, a Facebook user post that said, "How
           | can anyone justify supporting the killing of babies and
           | innocent civilians..." was removed under Community Standards
           | on "bullying and harassment."[75] Another user posted an
           | image on Instagram of a dead child in a hospital in Gaza with
           | the comment, "Israel bombs the Baptist Hospital in Gaza City
           | killing over 500..." which was removed under Community
           | Guidelines on "violence and incitement."[76]
        
           | breppp wrote:
           | HRW is a "complicated" organization. It took money from
           | Saudis in return for not advocating for LGBT rights in the
           | middle east [1]. It agreed to take money from the Qatari
           | government, a government that also supports Hamas [2][3] and
           | is involved in corruption cases and buying of politicians all
           | over the world.
           | 
           | [1] https://theintercept.com/2020/03/02/human-rights-watch-
           | took-...
           | 
           | [2] https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/middle-
           | east/1700763578-human-...
           | 
           | [3] https://www.memri.org/reports/raven-project-leaks-
           | alleged-qa...
        
             | someotherperson wrote:
             | This feels like a dog whistle rather than providing
             | something substantive.
             | 
             | The Israeli government also helped facilitate Qatar's
             | support for Hamas[0], what's your point here?
             | 
             | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_support_for_Hamas
             | #Isra...
        
           | googlryas wrote:
           | This is exactly why I want to see the posts, because I don't
           | really trust 3rd parties to accurately classify "peaceful
           | content in support of Palestine". It's possible Facebook is
           | wrong. It's also possible that it's filled with content that
           | is peaceful in only the most shallow, ignorant reading
           | possible. e.g. (paraphrasing from my facebook feed last year,
           | on a post which was not taken down): "I'm planning a
           | celebration on October 7th in support of my Palestinian
           | friends, who wants to join me :)"
        
         | thomassmith65 wrote:
         | The article mentions requests to remove posts quoting Ghassan
         | Kanafani. The article introduces Kanafani as a literary figure,
         | but then discusses his involvement in the PFLP. I don't know if
         | they want the reader to form a particular judgement about this,
         | or if they're just reporting the facts.
        
         | abeppu wrote:
         | It sounds like you're using the fact that the posts aren't
         | available for you to view to evaluate as a weakness of the
         | reporting on this suppression campaign, but of course they're
         | not available _because_ of the suppression campaign.
         | 
         | Surely the burden should be on the censors to establish clearly
         | that something is in fact incitement to violence, rather than
         | on external reporters to magically show that content which has
         | been taken down is not incitement?
        
           | bawolff wrote:
           | Generally i hold the burden to prove wrong-doing is on the
           | party allegging wrong-doing. Otherwise we get in a situation
           | where it can be effectively impossible for the accused to
           | prove their innocence, as it is much more difficult to prove
           | a negative than a positive.
        
             | abeppu wrote:
             | ... and you're absolutely right, innocent people had
             | basically no recourse when Meta took down their content, or
             | shadow-banned them etc on the claim that they were inciting
             | violence, pro-terrorist, engaging in hate-speech etc. The
             | accused cannot publicly point to their post which merely
             | used a palestinian flag emoji, or mentioned an assassinated
             | writer. The burden should have been much higher for Meta
             | when casting such accusations about.
        
               | bawolff wrote:
               | Both of these things can be true.
        
               | abeppu wrote:
               | Sure the burden _should_ be high in both directions.
               | 
               | But the journalists seem to be doing a decent job of
               | announcing and describing the data they have, and
               | confirming it with multiple sources within Meta. They're
               | engaged in a seemingly earnest and forthright effort to
               | make the case. And to the degree that it's limited, it
               | seems those limits are due to Meta itself.
               | 
               | Meta, on the other hand, excepting these whistleblowers,
               | makes very little information available about their take-
               | down actions both at the level of individual cases or at
               | the level of their systematic responses to governments.
               | The whistleblowers claim that Meta regularly took down
               | posts without human review when requested by the
               | Israelis. That's the exact opposite of the high burden of
               | proof that you're asking for.
        
               | bawolff wrote:
               | If we want to blame meta for having opaque review
               | processes with little option to appeal then i'd agree.
               | 
               | In terms of the implied proposition that israel is
               | intentionally using the take down process to shield
               | itself from criticism. I just dont think the evidence in
               | the article supports that proposition. I would expect the
               | stuff mentioned in the article to happen both in the case
               | Israel is trying to get criticism taken down and in the
               | case Israel is only interested in having "kill 'em all"
               | type posts taken down. So i don't find the article very
               | compelling.
        
         | esalman wrote:
         | I am part of a neighborhood group where I grew up in Bangladesh
         | and lived until 5th grade in the 90s.
         | 
         | The group admin this morning let us know via Facebook post that
         | he has received warnings frm Facebook. The group is "at a risk
         | of being suspended" because way too many posts relating to
         | "dangerous organization and individuals" have been removed. He
         | wants everyone to be extra careful when posting about
         | p*l*s*i*e, I*r*e*, g*z*, j*w* etc. He used asterisks himself
         | just to be extra careful himself.
         | 
         | Not to mention my country is dealing with rohingya crisis,
         | which was fueled by Facebook and WhatsApp misinformation
         | campaigns, and Facebook had 2 moderators for the whole country
         | of Myanmar and refused to do anything about said misinformation
         | campaigns. But they sure make exceptions for I*r*e*.
        
           | Capricorn2481 wrote:
           | > Not to mention my country is dealing with rohingya crisis,
           | which was fueled by Facebook and WhatsApp misinformation
           | campaigns, and Facebook had 2 moderators for the whole
           | country of Myanmar and refused to do anything about said
           | misinformation campaigns. But they sure make exceptions for I
           | _r_ e*
           | 
           | Not sure why you're downvoted. This is all true.
        
         | shihab wrote:
         | As a recent example, the instagram of guardian journalist Owen
         | jones (well known Israel critic) was suddenly suspended without
         | any explanation today.
         | 
         | It has been since restored, after a predictable twitter storm.
        
           | dijit wrote:
           | Wasn't that caused by pro-palestinian people reporting him
           | out of hatred for attending a "butt-mitzvah" Jewish gay
           | party?
        
         | nashashmi wrote:
         | Every pro Palestinian protestor has experienced some form of
         | awareness suppression and content removal. They have known this
         | was a thing long before anyone else did.
         | 
         | Same thing happened during 9/11. Muslims saw suppression,
         | bullying by the police and no one covered it. Then the tables
         | turned on maga republicans after j6.
        
           | dijit wrote:
           | I'm too stupid to navigate this topic in anything other than
           | a crude and adolescent way, however I think it could be
           | tricky for pro-palestinians because they can fall easily into
           | the trap of using party slogans used by proscribed
           | organisations.
           | 
           | My understanding of Hamas is that they are not considered a
           | legitimate army, but if they were they would be guilty of an
           | insurmountable number of war crimes (not unlike the IDF as
           | many would say). Showing support for such things is beyond
           | reasonable accepted discourse in my home country.
        
         | chacham15 wrote:
         | Since nobody here has actually read the article, it states that
         | the reason the posts were taken down was "prohibits incitement
         | to terrorism praise for acts of terrorism and identification or
         | support of terror organizations." This type of speech
         | (incitement) is illegal in the United States and support is
         | very borderline depending on the type and meaning of "support".
         | Now, if the reason doesnt match the actual content removed that
         | should definitely be addressed which is your point, but I think
         | that the reason is valid.
        
       | zombiwoof wrote:
       | People still use Facebook?
        
         | ben_w wrote:
         | Personal anecdote: whever I log in to the feed, 1/3 of posts
         | are ads, 1/3 are algorithmic recommendations, and 1/3 are pro-
         | Palestine posts by a former partner.
         | 
         | Almost none of my other connections post anything, though there
         | are occasional exceptions.
        
       | aucisson_masque wrote:
       | I like to think we are in a better place than russia for instance
       | with all its propaganda and jailed journalists, but then i see
       | these kind of article come over and over....
       | 
       | Most of the people in the 'free world' goes on mainstream media,
       | like facebook to get their news. These companies are enticed to
       | 'suck up' to the government because at the end they are business,
       | they need to be in good term with ruling class.
       | 
       | you end up with most media complying with the official story
       | pushed by government and friends, and most people believing that
       | because no one has the time to fact check everything.
       | 
       | One could argue that the difference with russia is that someone
       | can actually look for real information, but even in russia people
       | have access to vpn to bypass the censorship.
       | 
       | Another difference would be that you are allowed to express your
       | opinion, whereas in russia you would be put to jail, that's true
       | but only in a very limited way. Since everyone goes on mainstream
       | media and they enforce the government narrative, you can't speak
       | there. you are merely allowed to speak out in your little corner
       | out of reach to anyone, and even then since most people believe
       | the government propaganda, your arguments won't be heard at all.
       | 
       | The more i think about it, the less difference i see.
        
         | gooosle wrote:
         | The difference with Russia is that they are much worse at
         | hiding their corruption and censorship.
        
           | rchaud wrote:
           | Russia doesn't bang the drum of "free speech" ad nauseam the
           | way US social media magnates do.
        
             | gooosle wrote:
             | Sure, the 'free speech' propaganda is a conscious part of
             | the (better/more effective) public opinion manipulation
             | playbook.
        
             | tryauuum wrote:
             | True. I was born in Russia and to be honest I wish Russia
             | would at least "bang the drum of free speech" as well. If
             | you pretend to have some values you actually make people
             | start to believe in them a bit
        
         | newsclues wrote:
         | It's not a better or worse government (although it may be),
         | it's just different.
        
         | uniqueuid wrote:
         | You're not arrested for posting this, so that is a pretty big
         | difference to Russia (and other authoritarian nations like
         | China and Turkey), no?
         | 
         | https://rsf.org/en/country/russia
        
           | Cyph0n wrote:
           | You do realize that this is where things are going, right?
           | Have you not heard of the arrests and recent deportations of
           | student protestors?
           | 
           | I don't understand why we keep forgetting that
           | authoritarianism is a slippery slope.
        
             | uniqueuid wrote:
             | You have a point with democratic backsliding - but then
             | your rights hinge on the impartiality of the judicial
             | system (as a whole, and eventually, not necessarily
             | individual decisions evidently). It's pretty obvious that
             | the legal systems even in flawed democracies is still
             | vastly better than in those autocracies.
        
               | Cyph0n wrote:
               | A tale as old as time: watch from the sidelines while
               | things are relatively "good" before suddenly finding
               | yourself on the naughty list.
        
               | ethbr1 wrote:
               | Checks and balances are a crucial feature of American
               | democracy.
               | 
               | It's almost as though the framers of the Constitution
               | foresaw the possibility of the two elected branches of
               | government (executive and legislative) being monopolized
               | by the same group, at some point.
               | 
               | And that the very flexibility of regular, open, direct
               | elections also required a check to protect the
               | fundamental rights of all people in the country.
        
               | candiddevmike wrote:
               | They may have foresaw it but they did little if anything
               | to prevent it. They lamented that political parties would
               | probably be the downfall, and here we are...
        
               | ethbr1 wrote:
               | > _little if anything to prevent it_
               | 
               | The prevention is literally in the Constitution! Do you
               | think other branches of government would be deferring to
               | the Supreme Court if it weren't spelled out that they
               | must?
        
             | BeetleB wrote:
             | > You do realize that this is where things are going,
             | right?
             | 
             | This has been going on for decades.
             | 
             | > Have you not heard of the arrests and recent deportations
             | of student protestors?
             | 
             | The legality of which will be decided (hopefully) by the
             | courts. If this turns out to be legal, the fault doesn't
             | lie at the hands of Trump and his cronies, but at a broken
             | system we've had - for decades. Getting rid of him won't
             | solve this. Having checks and balances will.
             | 
             | Much of his and Elon's actions are within the power that
             | has been legally granted to them. And _that_ is the
             | problem. Congress is not limiting those powers. Voters are
             | another part of checks and balances, and they happily
             | wanted to give him those powers.
             | 
             | The problem isn't Trump. It's the country. Been broken for
             | a while, but it took time for someone to clearly
             | demonstrate how broken it is.
        
               | Cyph0n wrote:
               | Agreed. And nowhere did I say that the problem is Trump.
               | I was simply using current events as proof that we are
               | already in a bad state.
        
           | NoTeslaThrow wrote:
           | Yea but there's also not much point in critiquing the
           | government here. What we ever been able to do about it except
           | riot? We can endlessly discuss the failures of government and
           | as it stands I don't think we will never see these failures
           | distinguish candidates in the voting booth. Which is
           | confusing, because you'd think the democrats would have
           | wanted to win this time.
        
           | pydry wrote:
           | Yea people are actually
           | https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3rnzp4ye5zo
           | 
           | The western endorsement of the genocide in Gaza has been some
           | of the best PR Putin could ever have hoped for.
           | 
           | It simultaneously underlined the viciousness, the lack of
           | moral credibility and extreme hypocrisy of western leaders in
           | the eyes of the nonaligned world (e.g. the global south),
           | none of whom sanctioned him.
        
           | perihelions wrote:
           | America's arrested rather a large number of people in recent
           | weeks--university students, mostly--for expressing viewpoints
           | on the I/P conflict. The current Administration is claiming,
           | and no one's yet stopped them, that First Amendment rights
           | don't apply to non-citizens such as international students.
           | 
           | - _" You're not arrested for posting this"_
           | 
           | For what it's worth, it's widely reported that ICE is
           | trawling social media to find targets (targeted for their
           | speech/viewpoints). HN itself is one of their known targets.
        
             | bcrosby95 wrote:
             | It doesn't matter if they're citizens or not if the
             | government is skipping court thus not being required to
             | prove it either way. Then when they oopsie you to another
             | country they have to at least try to pretend to get you
             | back but the courts need to show "deference owed to the
             | executive branch in the conduct of foreign affairs".
             | 
             | Which is a long way of saying the executive can blackhole
             | anyone it wants to a foreign country and no one is going to
             | do anything because god forbid we step on the executive's
             | role to give up people in our country to other countries.
        
               | aeternum wrote:
               | >Which is a long way of saying the executive can
               | blackhole anyone it wants
               | 
               | Do you have examples of the executive doing this to
               | citizens or are you being hypothetical here?
               | 
               | Countries generally grant far fewer rights to non-
               | citizens. Have you considered how allowing non-citizens
               | to spread discontent within a country could be abused?
        
               | perihelions wrote:
               | - _" Do you have examples of the executive doing this to
               | citizens or are you being hypothetical here?"_
               | 
               | "Do you have examples of this severity-11 CVE being used
               | in the wild, or are you just being hypothetical here?"
               | It's a horrifically exploitable bug, were it left
               | unpatched.
               | 
               | It's not some fringe conspiracy theory that this is how
               | the law works and how the law _would_ work on contact
               | with US citizens; the _Garcia_ SCOTUS concurrence
               | explicitly underscored this perversity,
               | 
               | - _" The Government's argument, moreover, implies that it
               | could deport and incarcerate any person, including U.S.
               | citizens_ [sic!], _without legal consequence, so long as
               | it does so before a court can intervene... That view
               | refutes itself. "_
               | 
               | https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a949_lkhn.p
               | df
        
               | packetlost wrote:
               | Here's the executive branch getting ordered by SCOTUS to
               | bring someone back for doing just that:
               | https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62gnzzeg34o
        
               | gs17 wrote:
               | They were asking about it happening to citizens. From
               | your article:
               | 
               | > Mr Garcia, a Salvadoran
        
               | miltonlost wrote:
               | He's a permanent resident. Splitting hairs over
               | citizenship when he was here legally massively misses the
               | problem with blackholing people here legally.
        
               | georgemcbay wrote:
               | > Splitting hairs over citizenship when he was here
               | legally massively misses the problem with blackholing
               | people here legally.
               | 
               | And on top of that this case should be horrifying to
               | anyone regardless of whether they want to split hairs
               | because:
               | 
               | A) they admitted he was deported in error
               | 
               | B) they are now effectively trying to argue there is no
               | way to get him back
               | 
               | So even if you believe they would never knowingly do this
               | to an actual citizen they are only one slightly different
               | mistake from disappearing a citizen, whether or not it
               | has happened yet.
               | 
               | Nevermind the fact that Trump himself has repeatedly
               | floated the idea of deporting citizens: https://www.washi
               | ngtonpost.com/immigration/2025/04/10/trump-...
               | 
               | And then lastly and most importantly IMO it is wildly un-
               | American to believe anyone (regardless of citizenship or
               | legal status) is not entitled to due process.
        
               | packetlost wrote:
               | He's married to a citizen which gives him an avenue
               | towards legal residency and full citizenship.
               | 
               | It doesn't matter anyways because the government
               | _admitted_ he was deported due to a administrative error
               | and because they actively undermined and sidestepped the
               | courts authority on several occasions, there is
               | effectively nothing stopping them from doing it to full
               | blown citizens. Honestly, it sounds like it 's just a
               | matter of time if this keeps up.
        
               | gs17 wrote:
               | I agree it's bad, and yes, the government admitted they
               | shouldn't have done it. But regardless, the question was
               | about if it has happened to a citizen, not a person who
               | maybe could be a citizen one day but is not, and you
               | responded with them "doing just that" when they did not,
               | in fact, "do just that".
               | 
               | I'm not sure why there's a need to mislead when what's
               | actually happening is bad enough.
        
               | ToucanLoucan wrote:
               | It's not a need to mislead. You're grasping at a
               | technicality. Citizenship is irrelevant if you're not
               | given the chance to demonstrate it, which he wasn't, and
               | again, he was actually deported because of the
               | administrative error, not an on-purpose action, the
               | correctness of which is irrelevant.
               | 
               | You're arguing whether a car wrapped around a tree has a
               | bad alternator. Surely a fact useful to someone,
               | somewhere, and worth knowing. But also certainly not the
               | reason there's a problem.
        
               | biker142541 wrote:
               | 100% this. To echo another poster below, it's really
               | important to read the Supreme Court's own words here.
               | 
               | >"The Government's argument, moreover, implies that it
               | could deport and incarcerate any person, including U. S.
               | citizens, without legal consequence, so long as it does
               | so before a court can intervene. " From https://www.supre
               | mecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a949_lkhn.pdf
               | 
               | I suspect that is one of the main reasons behind the
               | order. It's very obvious that citizen vs legal resident
               | matters very little here, if due process is not given.
        
               | _DeadFred_ wrote:
               | You would agree that this whole discussion would be
               | considered insanity in America like 4 months ago, right?
        
               | Hikikomori wrote:
               | If they can ignore due process in this case what's to say
               | they cannot do it to proper citizens? It's clear they're
               | probing their way into creating a blueprint to get rid of
               | people critical of trump.
        
               | amalcon wrote:
               | Would his being a citizen have mattered to any of the
               | procedures prior to his rendition? The government never
               | made any effort to prove that he was here illegally
               | (which is important since he wasn't), and he never had an
               | opportunity to offer a defense.
        
               | empath75 wrote:
               | It happens to be the case that he's not a citizen or
               | claiming to be a citizen, but he wasn't given due
               | process, and there's absolutely nothing stopping them
               | from picking anybody up off the street, claiming they're
               | here illegally, and shipping them off to an El Salvadoran
               | prison.
               | 
               | All people in the us, legal or illegal, citizen or not,
               | have fourth amendment protections, and if you strip those
               | rights from anyone, you remove them from everyone.
        
               | billfor wrote:
               | Do they? We generally don't give noncitizens the right to
               | own a gun in the us, so clearly we are selective about
               | applying the 2nd amendment protection. The 4th may need
               | adjudication.
        
               | empath75 wrote:
               | Permanent residents have the right to own a gun in the
               | US.
               | 
               | The supreme court has upheld many many times that the
               | fourth amendment applies to all people within the borders
               | of the US.
        
               | efnx wrote:
               | What about that guy who got deported to El Salvador even
               | though he was legally here and the court had also ordered
               | he not be sent back to El Salvador for his own
               | protection? I'm pretty sure the admin admitted it was a
               | mistake then refused to bring him back.
        
               | ethbr1 wrote:
               | The Supreme Court resolutely batted that down 9-0 in a
               | few days.
               | 
               | >> _The [District Court] order properly requires the
               | Government to "facilitate" Abrego Garcia's release from
               | custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is
               | handled as it would have been had he not been improperly
               | sent to El Salvador. The intended scope of the term
               | "effectuate" in the District Court's order is, however,
               | unclear, and may exceed the District Court's authority.
               | The District Court should clarify its directive, with due
               | regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in
               | the conduct of foreign affairs. For its part, the
               | Government should be prepared to share what it can
               | concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of
               | further steps._ https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p
               | df/24a949_lkhn.pdf
               | 
               | The only question at this point is how detailed in
               | demands the District Court can be.
               | 
               | The administration attempted to push the boundaries of
               | executive power and lost in court, as has been happening.
               | 
               | Turns out, conservative justices with lifetime
               | appointments aren't too legally thrilled about an
               | unbridled executive either.
        
               | passive wrote:
               | This order was toothless, and the administration has
               | already flouted it.
               | 
               | All John Roberts is doing is asking Trump to go further
               | next time. Whether it's intentional or just cowardice on
               | his part doesn't really matter to the rest of us.
        
               | ethbr1 wrote:
               | It matter to me, since there are 2-3 conservative
               | justices on the current Supreme Court that are likely to
               | tire of administration excesses.
               | 
               | A long game player might even say Roberts is angling for
               | that, by tailoring consensus opinions that nonetheless
               | leave room for the administration to demonstrate further
               | stupidity.
        
               | bcrosby95 wrote:
               | Yes, that is where my quote came from. From your own
               | quote:
               | 
               | > The District Court should clarify its directive, with
               | due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch
               | in the conduct of foreign affairs.
               | 
               | Which is such a ridiculously bullshit line of thought.
               | This wasn't some person who willingly went to some random
               | country, this is someone the executive illegally put
               | there against the person's will _in coordination with_
               | said foreign government. I can guarantee you that any
               | order with teeth will be struck down by SCOTUS on this
               | line of thought.
        
               | ethbr1 wrote:
               | I'm not sure why people obtusely intepret Supreme Court
               | rulings as though they're part of the current
               | administration.
               | 
               | The court is obviously saying that (1) it's correct and
               | necessary to bring him back but that (2) the District
               | Court doesn't have unbridled authority to order any
               | foreign policy-influencing remedy it wants.
               | 
               | I.e. a US court couldn't order a president to sign a
               | treaty
               | 
               | If the administration tries to foot drag further, the
               | Supreme Court will likely order more specific remedies.
               | 
               | By not taking the L here, the administration is just
               | burning whatever conservative goodwill they might have
               | started with on this Supreme Court.
        
               | zzrrt wrote:
               | > Do you have examples of the executive doing this to
               | citizens
               | 
               | Feels like moving the goalposts. First they were going to
               | clear out "illegals" by any means, now the line includes
               | any non-citizens. Granted maybe you personally didn't say
               | both though.
               | 
               | > Have you considered how allowing non-citizens to spread
               | discontent within a country could be abused?
               | 
               | Is it meaningfully different from allowing citizens to
               | "spread discontent"? Why not just start taking
               | everybody's 1st amendment rights, by the same logic? I'm
               | not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure there's long precedent
               | that non-citizens are granted most of the same rights,
               | including freedom of speech and assembly.
               | 
               | If non-citizens are being supported, instructed, etc by
               | their government in spreading discontent, there are
               | probably laws like espionage for that; you don't have to
               | take away everybody else's freedom to stop them.
        
               | cmurf wrote:
               | Does the Constitution provide for due process to persons?
               | Or only citizens?
               | 
               | If non-citizen have been human trafficked without due
               | process, what additional protection against it is
               | provided to citizens? Where is that stated?
        
             | _Algernon_ wrote:
             | Not great but still better than defenestration I guess.
        
               | pydry wrote:
               | Well, it's not like they were Boeing whistleblowers or
               | leaked video footage of a war crime.
        
             | elcritch wrote:
             | I've seen a few news articles on arrests and the headlines
             | are attention grabbing "Ivy League Student arrested for
             | protesting" and it's worrisome to see.
             | 
             | However then buried in the article is something like they
             | overstayed their visa, etc. Take a sibling comment's link
             | to an article with a "second student arrested" in the
             | title. As in that seems like there isn't a "large number".
             | This is nothing like the reports of arrests in Russia.
             | Especially as some of these pro-Palestinian protestors
             | advocate violence or intifada pretty freely. I've seen that
             | with my own eyes.
             | 
             | If I were a foreign national protesting and advocating for
             | violence against any other country or people group I'd
             | expect to be denied a visa or possibly deported for
             | participating in such events. It'd be arrogant not to
             | expect that outcome IMHO.
             | 
             | Visa applications in European Union countries often include
             | things such as "indicators of good civil behavior". Take
             | the quotes from that sibling comment's linked BBC article:
             | 
             | > The DHS statement says that Ms Kordia had overstayed her
             | student visa, which had been terminated in 2022 "for lack
             | of attendance". It did not say whether she had been
             | attending Columbia or another institution. > She had
             | previously been arrested in April 2024 for taking part in
             | protests at Columbia University, according to DHS. > "It is
             | a privilege to be granted a visa to live and study in the
             | United States of America," said Homeland Security Secretary
             | Kristi Noem in a statement. > "When you advocate for
             | violence and terrorism that privilege should be revoked,
             | and you should not be in this country."
        
               | colanderman wrote:
               | Rumeysa Ozturk did not overstay her visa nor advocate
               | violence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detention_of_R%C3
               | %BCmeysa_%C3%...
               | 
               | Nor did Rasha Alawieh: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depo
               | rtation_of_Rasha_Alawieh
        
               | elcritch wrote:
               | And cases like Rumeysa Ozturk's are different. I also
               | believe DHS should have to abide by the courts as well.
               | Her case is also getting national and international
               | attention and legal help.
        
               | empath75 wrote:
               | > As in that seems like there isn't a "large number". ---
               | 
               | > "But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or
               | hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes.
               | That's the difficulty. If the last and worst act of the
               | whole regime had come immediately after the first and
               | smallest, thousands, yes, millions would have been
               | sufficiently shocked--if, let us say, the gassing of the
               | Jews in '43 had come immediately after the 'German Firm'
               | stickers on the windows of non-Jewish shops in '33. But
               | of course this isn't the way it happens. In between come
               | all the hundreds of little steps, some of them
               | imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to be
               | shocked by the next. Step C is not so much worse than
               | Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step B, why
               | should you at Step C? And so on to Step D.
               | 
               | And one day, too late, your principles, if you were ever
               | sensible of them, all rush in upon you. The burden of
               | self-deception has grown too heavy, and some minor
               | incident, in my case my little boy, hardly more than a
               | baby, saying 'Jewish swine,' collapses it all at once,
               | and you see that everything, everything, has changed and
               | changed completely under your nose. The world you live in
               | --your nation, your people--is not the world you were
               | born in at all. The forms are all there, all untouched,
               | all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the
               | mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the
               | holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because
               | you made the lifelong mistake of identifying it with the
               | forms, is changed. Now you live in a world of hate and
               | fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even know
               | it themselves; when everyone is transformed, no one is
               | transformed. Now you live in a system which rules without
               | responsibility even to God. The system itself could not
               | have intended this in the beginning, but in order to
               | sustain itself it was compelled to go all the way." --
               | Milton Sanford Mayer, They Thought They Were Free: The
               | Germans 1933-45
               | 
               | ---
               | 
               | You have to say "No" loudly and clearly at the _first
               | offense_, and not wait until it's too late.
        
             | maeil wrote:
             | Chris Krebs just yesterday had his security clearance
             | revoked solely for saying the 2020 election was fair and
             | not rigged.
             | 
             | His coworkers at SentinelOne (almost certainly most of who
             | are citizens) also had their clearances revoked, despite
             | never speaking out on the topic, purely as a North Korea
             | style "punish the whole family" approach to strike fear
             | into people of guilt by association, so that those who have
             | spoken out in any shape or form become social pariahs.
             | 
             | Citizens having their career taken away for saying an
             | election wasn't rigged, or for happening to work at the
             | same place as someone who said this.
             | 
             | If you think the status quo hasn't yet changed to "In
             | countries like China, Russia and the US, speaking out
             | against the government puts both your livelihood and that
             | of those in your vicinity at serious risk", you're dead
             | wrong.
        
               | wtf_is_this wrote:
               | In case anyone is curious about this (as I was) here's an
               | article: https://www.csoonline.com/article/3958808/trump-
               | revokes-secu...
        
               | esafak wrote:
               | Maybe it's time to rethink the visibility and permanence
               | of HN discussions.
        
               | maeil wrote:
               | That would be great, but I don't see it. HN has already
               | been obviously violating GDPR and all other right-to-
               | forget laws since forever by not allowong for account
               | deletion, and everytime this has been brought up, dang
               | has pretty much confirmed they don't care ("it would look
               | bad if there were deleted comments [and that's more
               | important than these laws]").
        
           | moogly wrote:
           | https://edition.cnn.com/2025/04/02/us/israel-protesters-
           | us-s...
        
           | ath3nd wrote:
           | > You're not arrested for posting this
           | 
           | Your funds might be cut off though: https://www.theguardian.c
           | om/commentisfree/2025/apr/07/trump-...
           | 
           | Or your president might declare a wartime law to deport all
           | the immigrants:
           | https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp34ylep987o
           | 
           | Or you, a honors student (but not a citizen) might find
           | yourself in an unmarked van if you dared to question the
           | powers that be.
           | https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czrn57340xlo
           | 
           | Sure it happens to immigrants only for now, brings memory to
           | this poem:
           | 
           | First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--
           | Because I was not a socialist.
           | 
           | Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak
           | out-- Because I was not a trade unionist.
           | 
           | Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
           | Because I was not a Jew.
           | 
           | Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for
           | me.
        
             | abeppu wrote:
             | > Sure it happens to immigrants only for now
             | 
             | ... and they're trying to end birthright citizenship. I.e.
             | people who are literally not immigrants (were born here and
             | perhaps have never lived anywhere else) are already being
             | lined up for this.
        
             | throwing_away wrote:
             | It's not unreasonable to see the situation as "Then they
             | came for the Jews, and the administration finally deported
             | the people who were coming for the Jews".
             | 
             | The president's literal argument for doing it is that the
             | activist groups are coming for all of American life.
             | 
             | I'm not a big fan of either side's rhetoric, but clearly
             | the horseshoe has become a ring.
        
               | ath3nd wrote:
               | > I'm not a big fan of either side's rhetoric, but
               | clearly the horseshoe has become a ring.
               | 
               | Either side? Tell me which "side" does that sound like?
               | 
               | - hostility towards non traditional sexuality
               | 
               | - immigration being used as the scapegoat for economic
               | problems
               | 
               | - strong feeling of national exceptionalism
               | 
               | - assault on women's productivity rights
               | 
               | - politicizing of science
               | 
               | - deportation for political reasons
               | 
               | - "Roman" salutes
               | 
               | It brings parallels with some things happening in Europe
               | some time ago.
               | 
               | > activist groups are coming for all of American life.
               | 
               | I wonder who's actually going for all of American life
               | though. Let's take Birthright citizenship, which has been
               | established in 1868. Is that American life enough for
               | you?
               | 
               | "All persons born or naturalized in the United States,
               | and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of
               | the United States and of the State wherein they reside."
               | 
               | And guess who goes against this American way of life
               | value? An orange grandpa married to an immigrant. You
               | really can't make this up.
               | 
               | https://www.npr.org/2025/03/14/nx-s1-5327552/trump-takes-
               | bir...
        
           | aprilthird2021 wrote:
           | Right. We don't have to arrest. We can just disappear
           | anything you say critical of our masters, I mean, our
           | overlords, I mean, our government, I mean, a foreign
           | government, I mean, a foreign government that hacks American
           | companies and sells the hacks to Middle Eastern dictators who
           | breed an ideology that trained people to attack our own
           | country, I mean...
        
           | shihab wrote:
           | As someone who came from a pretty authoritarian country- let
           | me assure you that people there do routinely criticize their
           | government, mock them all the time. Governments often do not
           | have the bandwidth to deal with the volume of criticism, and
           | even when they do- they wisely realize that letting people
           | vent a little online is better than complete crackdown. I
           | myself routinely did this in Facebook, where many in my
           | friend list were government employees and (ex-ruling) party
           | members.
           | 
           | I am in fact far more afraid of pro-palestine speech from USA
           | as an immigrant than I was in my home country- and please
           | trust me I am not exaggerating here.
        
             | selectodude wrote:
             | >I am in fact far more afraid of pro-palestine speech from
             | USA as an immigrant than I was in my home country- and
             | please trust me I am not exaggerating here.
             | 
             | I would have laughed at this until pretty recently. How
             | wrong I was.
        
             | fundad wrote:
             | Do you mean pro-Palestinian sentiments scare you or are you
             | afraid of expressing pro-Palestinian sentiment?
        
               | MPSFounder wrote:
               | Likely he means expressing any pro-Palestine sentiments.
               | Doxxing is very common and if Ivy League deans were taken
               | down, immigrants are likely to be deported for expressing
               | any empathy towards the Palestinian.
        
           | hurtuvac78 wrote:
           | Actually now US citizens are impacted too.
           | 
           |  _Michigan-based attorney Amir Makled [a US citizen] was
           | detained by federal immigration agents while returning home
           | from a family vacation_
           | 
           | https://www.npr.org/2025/04/09/nx-s1-5357455/attorney-
           | detain...
        
             | intermerda wrote:
             | They've discussed deporting US citizens to gulags -
             | https://truthout.org/articles/white-house-press-sec-says-
             | tru...
        
             | BeetleB wrote:
             | He was detained at immigration. This happens all the time,
             | and has been happening routinely since 2001.
             | 
             | (Not saying it's good or anything - just not new).
        
               | cma wrote:
               | Freest country, hardly anyone lives within 100 miles of
               | the coast I'm sure https://www.aclu.org/know-your-
               | rights/border-zone
        
               | tdeck wrote:
               | The authoritarian future isn't evenly distributed. Some
               | groups of people have been dealing with it for decades,
               | while others are in for a surprise.
        
           | testing22321 wrote:
           | If you post it and nobody ever sees it, that is functionally
           | the same result as not being allowed to post it.
        
           | tdeck wrote:
           | > and other authoritarian nations like China and Turkey
           | 
           | And Israel, where a history teacher was arrested for making a
           | post on Facebook:
           | 
           | https://www.democracynow.org/2023/11/22/meir_baruchin
        
             | aprilthird2021 wrote:
             | This Israeli as well, had everything taken from her for 4
             | IG posts:
             | 
             | https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/03/magazine/israel-free-
             | spee...
        
           | ajsnigrutin wrote:
           | I think UK leads here:
           | 
           | https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/54123/were-
           | over...
           | 
           | (many links in the responses and comments, eg:
           | https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/arrests-for-
           | offensive-... - " 625 arrests were made for alleged section
           | 127 offences in 2010 " just in london)
        
           | rozap wrote:
           | He could have his visa revoked though.
        
           | newaccountlol wrote:
           | People who have spoken out against the genocidal apartheid
           | regime are being black-bagged in the street by plainclothes
           | officers all across the United States. The gap between the
           | supposedly enlightened West and Russia grows smaller by the
           | day.
        
           | Hikikomori wrote:
           | They don't need to arrest him because the narrative is
           | already controlled, as shown by the article, and by going to
           | any traditional news site.
        
           | anonair wrote:
           | Why arrest if you can silence?
        
           | garyrob wrote:
           | As someone said above, "America's arrested rather a large
           | number of people in recent weeks--university students, mostly
           | --for expressing viewpoints on the I/P conflict. The current
           | Administration is claiming, and no one's yet stopped them,
           | that First Amendment rights don't apply to non-citizens such
           | as international students."
           | 
           | America is changing. What was true before isn't necessarily
           | true now, and may get worse, depending on election outcomes.
        
           | Viliam1234 wrote:
           | Nope. People in Russia getting murdered for speaking their
           | opinion, and my Facebook posts getting deleted, that is
           | exactly the same thing. Just like the starving kids in
           | Africa, and that one day when I couldn't buy my favorite
           | pizza because the shop was closed, also exactly the same
           | thing.
           | 
           | Now give me hundred upvotes because I am a cool contrarian
           | who is not afraid to criticize America. That basically makes
           | me an American equivalent of Navalny.
        
         | scottyah wrote:
         | It's still humans being humans, we just have a covert culture
         | while they are more overt. I personally like being
         | tricked/manipulated more than forced. I'd rather get Tom
         | Sawyered into painting a fence than being held at gunpoint.
        
         | NoTeslaThrow wrote:
         | Indeed. The editorial boards of these newsrooms are often
         | staffed with people who attended the same schools and classes
         | as those running the country. The social circles of the two
         | worlds are extremely closely linked.
         | 
         | Of course, this means that the reporting isn't very good at
         | addressing its blind spots-i.e., most of the news in the
         | country, let alone the world, that isn't relevant to the ivy
         | league coastal elites. And I say this as a member of that same
         | class. Most of the political perspectives in my life are
         | completely unrepresented in the opinion columns, which
         | generally tend to pander upwards rather than downwards.
         | 
         | I don't tend to put much weight in freedom of the press so long
         | as that press is floating on the cream of society and asking
         | the government permission to report on what they're doing.
        
           | shihab wrote:
           | The NYT's Executive Editor Joe Kahn is the son of a
           | billionaire who was on the board of lobby group CAMERA, a
           | group devoted to pressuring US media to be more pro-Israel.
        
           | shihab wrote:
           | And here is an article on Raffi berg, BBC's Middle East
           | editor:
           | 
           | https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/bbc-civil-war-gaza-israel-
           | bia...
        
         | alistairSH wrote:
         | Is Meta really considered "mainstream media"? I always took
         | that phrase to refer to NBC, CBS, NY Post, etc - the big legacy
         | news organizations (print and TV).
        
           | JKCalhoun wrote:
           | How does "mainstream" America increasingly get its news?
        
             | bee_rider wrote:
             | I read "mainstream" as one of those words like "modern," to
             | apply the media that was prevalent when the phrase was
             | coined. Technically modern architecture, if we read the
             | words literally and individually... well, I guess that
             | would be tent-cities, that seems to mostly be what gets
             | built nowadays.
             | 
             | Facebook, the tent-city of media, actually it would kinda
             | work if only the platform wasn't centrally controlled.
        
           | ljm wrote:
           | The big legacy news organisations would be legacy media.
           | 
           | Social media is not even 20 years old but it's a tall order
           | to deny it mainstream status since the younger generations
           | get their news from scrolling TikTok and not cracking open
           | the daily broadsheet.
           | 
           | Legacy media has been sourcing from Facebook, Twitter, and
           | Reddit for years. They're as mainstream as AP and Reuters but
           | without the reputation or the credentials.
        
           | petre wrote:
           | It's mainstream, it's media, people read their news on it, so
           | yes. But I'd rather trust NPR, BBC, the Guardian or some
           | other legacy news outlet, because these unscrupulous tech
           | bros will skew the narrarive by silencing some sources while
           | brainwashing people with whatever suits them best.
        
         | kubb wrote:
         | Anna Politkovskaya - Investigative journalist and critic of the
         | Chechen war, shot in Moscow (2006). Alexander Litvinenko - Ex-
         | FSB officer poisoned with polonium in London (2006).
         | 
         | Stanislav Markelov & Anastasia Baburova - Human rights lawyer
         | and journalist, shot in Moscow (2009).
         | 
         | Boris Nemtsov - Opposition leader, shot near the Kremlin
         | (2015).
         | 
         | Denis Voronenkov - Former Russian MP, shot in Kyiv (2017).
         | 
         | Nikolai Andrushchenko - Journalist, beaten to death in St.
         | Petersburg (2017).
         | 
         | Alexei Navalny - Opposition leader, died in prison after
         | previous poisoning (2024).
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | The difference is that they murder their political opponents
         | for show to make their people be afraid of dissent.
         | 
         | You comparing it with some (disgusting, vile) social media
         | company (which would improve the world immensely if it
         | disappeared) is completely inappropriate.
        
           | sharpshadow wrote:
           | If you gonna mix in politicians and opposition the USA has a
           | extensive list themselves.
        
             | tdeck wrote:
             | Fred Hampton would have something to say if, you know, he
             | were still alive.
        
           | basisword wrote:
           | "We're not as bad as them" is a poor argument. Particularly
           | while America quickly slides in that direction. Just take a
           | look at the deportation of Venezuelans especially the case of
           | the wrongly deported man that the government conveniently
           | "can't find". That's a story comparable to the stories
           | Americans tell about Russia and China.
        
           | bradly wrote:
           | I think OP is more using this incident along with many
           | others. Things similar to in February when the President
           | signed executive orders that imposed sanctions on American
           | law firms and lawyers which included suspension of security
           | clearances, termination of government contracts, and
           | restrictions preventing firm employees from accessing federal
           | buildings. (https://www.justsecurity.org/110109/president-
           | cannot-issue-a...)
           | 
           | I have no idea how to talk equality to speak of whether they
           | are comparable or not, but I do think people are seeing a
           | different atmosphere.
        
         | rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote:
         | I don't think this is necessarily an issue of censorship so
         | much as it is highlighting that Facebook is clearly a fucking
         | news publisher and should be treated as such under the law.
         | 
         | It's time to revoke section 230 for any social media network
         | that amplifies or buries content with a non-transparent
         | process.
         | 
         | In this case it isn't even merely an algorithm designed by
         | humans. They have LITERAL human editors choosing which stories
         | to put on the front page, just like the NYT, and they should be
         | held liable for the content on their platforms just like legacy
         | media is.
        
         | mnky9800n wrote:
         | Russia doesn't just put people in jail for speaking against the
         | government. They weaponise the generational fear of being
         | disappeared by the government. This is not close to what
         | happens in America where you can post anything anywhere and if
         | Facebook deletes it you can always make your own website about
         | it. If you did this in Russia you go to jail. Even if you say
         | things like "it is sad Ukrainian children die in children's day
         | in Russia" you go to jail. I don't think you can compare modern
         | USA with modern Russia in this way. USA does plenty of other
         | things that are bad like jailing so many people for petty
         | crimes without pushing much on speech. USA has its own problems
         | and all these comparisons only hide them.
        
           | spencerflem wrote:
           | They are now denying visas, and deporting lawful residents,
           | sending them to offshore torture prisons, for social media
           | posts.
           | 
           | For non citizens, regardless of length of time or legality,
           | this is the case right now. For birthright citizens and full
           | citizens it will be the case very soon
        
           | cma wrote:
           | They are sending people to a concentration camp without any
           | due process.
        
       | janalsncm wrote:
       | So when the government pointed to the disproportionate support
       | for Palestine on TikTok vs Instagram, it was actually because
       | Instagram was suppressing it. It is ironic.
       | 
       | https://x.com/hawleymo/status/1717505662601609401
        
         | nashashmi wrote:
         | Another reason why TikTok has to come under US ownership. How
         | else are we going to censor things when they are under China's
         | (lack of) control?
        
           | square_usual wrote:
           | And conversely, another reason why Trump's tariffs on China
           | are a bone-headed move. They are not going to sell TikTok
           | while the tariffs last, and the popular demand for it makes
           | banning it a non-starter.
        
           | bradly wrote:
           | Exactly. China demands Apple Maps be ran on Chinese servers
           | by Chinese workers. I would expect current U.S.
           | administration to be frustrated with these imbalances as
           | surveillance state measures increase. These imbalances were
           | less important when there was less interest in information
           | and truth suppression.
        
             | bradlys wrote:
             | At least for all the surveillance the Chinese do - the
             | standard of life is improving overall. We don't even get
             | that shit here in the US. Our life just gets worse by
             | practically every measure as the years go on and we're
             | taken advantage of on top of it.
        
               | cj wrote:
               | What benchmark are you using for standard of life?
        
               | DaSHacka wrote:
               | Number of citizens reeducated, I presume.
        
               | Viliam1234 wrote:
               | More organs harvested from political prisoners.
        
               | bradlys wrote:
               | Ah yes, the US known for putting people in prisons where
               | we use techniques the Nazis developed as part of our
               | "enhanced interrogation".
               | 
               | USA is totally way better than China here!
        
               | bradlys wrote:
               | At the very least, wages for the average citizen. It's
               | not perfect but at least there's movement towards
               | building something. What is the US building towards?
               | Enriching billionaires?
        
               | janalsncm wrote:
               | There's probably not one single benchmark (and I won't
               | say that all of them are negative in the US) but we can
               | just think generally about the things we'd like in a good
               | life:
               | 
               | Life expectancy. Chronic disease rates. Suicide rates.
               | Depression rates. Violent crime rates. Marriage rates.
               | Home ownership rates. Education rates. Debt rates. Labor
               | participation rates. Wealth inequity.
               | 
               | No one metric is a complete picture but together they
               | tell a story. If America was a product and the above was
               | on a dashboard, you would fire the CEO.
        
             | bognition wrote:
             | Where do you think the servers that power TikTok in the
             | United States are? Who do you think administers those
             | servers?
        
         | RedComet wrote:
         | Yes. This was clearly the reason for the ban in the first
         | place.
        
         | nikkwong wrote:
         | While this may be part of the story, it's certainly not the
         | full picture. We know that the CCP is actively manipulating the
         | algorithm on Tiktok to further their agenda on multiple other
         | geopolitical issues--something we have ample evidence for. I
         | don't know if there is a smoking gun on this one topic in
         | particular, but the CCP's goal has always been to divide the
         | American audience; and we know that older Americans skew pro-
         | Israel whilst younger Americans are more oriented towards being
         | pro-Palestinian. If someone looked in the right places, they
         | would more likely than not find evidence of algorithm
         | manipulation to favor a Palestinian bend.
        
           | janalsncm wrote:
           | > something we have ample evidence for
           | 
           | Can you share some of that evidence? My impression from the
           | SCOTUS case is that the government only alleged it could
           | happen, not that it was happening. So I'm a bit surprised to
           | see someone so confidently assert it is happening.
           | 
           | > more likely than not find evidence of algorithm
           | manipulation
           | 
           | I think a lot of people have been looking. For years. Yet you
           | admit there is no smoking gun. Perhaps if we look in the
           | right place we will find Russell's teapot orbiting Jupiter as
           | well. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot
        
             | ASalazarMX wrote:
             | I'd like to see that evidence too, hopefully for more than
             | one instance/source.
             | 
             | IMO, it's been obvious that the danger seen in TikTok is
             | that it's a propaganda tool out of USA's control. If it was
             | really a national security danger, USA could simply ban it
             | instead of fighting so hard to own it.
        
           | throw310822 wrote:
           | So, we have proof of a strong algorithm manipulation _by
           | Israel_ on the entire family of main US social media (those
           | used by the older segment of the population); and yet you
           | still manage to point your finger to a hypothetical, unproved
           | manipulation of the algorithm on the competitors ' social
           | media to explain the difference in attitude between
           | generations? But you have the answer here, there has been
           | manipulation of the social media consumed by the older
           | segment!
        
       | mjevans wrote:
       | I think my country (USA) would be healthier if a common sense
       | viewpoint was selected and held.
       | 
       | Conflicts are always terrible, and the Eurasia / Africa region
       | countries are particularly brutal.
       | 
       | Every citizen of every country has a human right (in a civilized
       | civilization / society) to live a life that does not involve
       | violence. A life where they are not worried about RPGs, bombings,
       | (etc,) or military invasions.
       | 
       | Some sources of conflict involve places which various (different)
       | religions hold as sacred / holy. Those sites should become UN
       | world heritage locations and be managed by the UN in ways that
       | only allow non-military peaceful access for any who want to
       | visit.
       | 
       | With respect to Gaza my personal opinion remains unchanged. Both
       | an innocent civilian people who suffer, and a terrorist
       | government, remain in that region. The civilians should be
       | evacuated. The terrorists who remain after (or whom are caught
       | and found guilty in a trial) should be purged. The country should
       | then be cleaned up, rebuilt, and returned to the innocent people
       | along with a training-wheels UN supported government that brings
       | stability, peace, and prevents a resurgence of hate and
       | terrorism. In a few generations the country can grow more stable
       | and graduate from the guided government structure.
       | 
       | That would be not just a two state solution, but a two states and
       | global peace sites solution.
        
         | devilbunny wrote:
         | I just don't see a way that a two-state solution works. A
         | _three_ -state solution might be feasible (Gaza and West Bank
         | governed separately), but then you have to deal with internal
         | Israeli politics, and I really don't know enough about them to
         | make even an educated guess about how hard it would be to get
         | that through (I would imagine very, but like I said, I know
         | very little about their politics).
        
         | Workaccount2 wrote:
         | Hamas isn't dumb, they very intentionally blend their goons
         | with the civilians. That's why this situation is such a mess.
         | Israel basically said "we are going to war and we are not going
         | to worry about who is and isn't a soldier anymore, they all
         | dress the same"
         | 
         | Everyone should be disbanded from Israel, the holy sites
         | destroyed, and the land turned into a nature reserve with
         | shoot-on-sight protections.
        
           | mjevans wrote:
           | That seems wasteful and excessive. Could you elaborate on the
           | upsides of this proposal? They are not obvious from my
           | perspective.
        
             | 20after4 wrote:
             | Not sure if I would call it an upside but I guess if you
             | destroy everything worth fighting for then maybe people
             | stop fighting? If you then execute anyone still willing to
             | persist I guess you can claim victory. This is how you win
             | the internet, just come up with one of the most extreme and
             | cynical responses possible.
        
             | Workaccount2 wrote:
             | [flagged]
        
               | dang wrote:
               | Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar hell.
               | It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is
               | for.
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
           | tdeck wrote:
           | > Israel basically said "we are going to war and we are not
           | going to worry about who is and isn't a soldier anymore, they
           | all dress the same"
           | 
           | When _did_ Israel worry about this, when it comes to
           | Palestinian civilians? This accusation from Israel supporters
           | makes no sense because Israel has never cared about killing
           | Palestinian civilians.
        
         | thot_experiment wrote:
         | this is grossly misunderstanding the situation in Gaza, a two
         | state solution was never acceptable to Israel, Hamas as it
         | exists today is a result of Netanyahu policy. Israel created
         | the monster to justify their genocide.
        
           | mjevans wrote:
           | That might be the case, but that man cannot live forever. I
           | am thinking long term, but am also just a civilian in the US.
           | If there is good reason to have another policy I would like
           | the experts to articulate that logic to us.
        
           | HappyPanacea wrote:
           | > a two state solution was never acceptable to Israel
           | 
           | Wrong, they accepted the 1947 partition plan and agreed to
           | the Oslo accords
        
             | cbzbc wrote:
             | The Oslo accords were intended - in the words of Rabin - to
             | give the Palestinians 'less than a state', and arguably the
             | division of the West Bank into Areas A, B and C have
             | allowed for the expansion of settlements in the latter.
             | 
             | Whether the 1947 partition was accepted as a final state
             | depends on who you ask, it's fairly clear that prominent
             | figures viewed it as a stop along the way to a more
             | comprehensive settlement. Take Ben Gurion ("After the
             | formation of a large army in the wake of the establishment
             | of the state, we will abolish partition and expand to the
             | whole of Palestine.") or Chaim Weizmann ("partition might
             | be only a temporary arrangement for the next twenty to
             | twenty-five years"). Menachem Begin's Herut continued to
             | use the slogan 'Both banks of the Jordan River", and this
             | language is reflected in Likud's founding charter.
        
           | mupuff1234 wrote:
           | Except Hamas took over Gaza in 2006/7 more or less in it's
           | current form, before Netanyahu came back into power at 2009.
           | 
           | Hamas has always been an extreme organization, they executed
           | a bunch of Fatah members by throwing them off buildings when
           | they took over gaza, not exactly a fun loving bunch.
           | 
           | Sure Netanyahu didn't exactly help to see the least, but
           | saying he is somehow solely responsible for Hamas is pretty
           | biased.
        
             | tdeck wrote:
             | > executed a bunch of Fatah members by throwing them off
             | buildings when they took over gaza
             | 
             | Was this before or after Fatah lost an election and then
             | refused to step down, instead staging a violent coup?
        
               | mupuff1234 wrote:
               | Are you actually trying to defend the execution of
               | prisoners?
               | 
               | And that's putting aside whether what you said is right
               | or wrong (which I'm sure you'll get very different
               | answers from each side)
        
             | basisword wrote:
             | >> Hamas has always been an extreme organization, they
             | executed a bunch of Fatah members by throwing them off
             | buildings when they took over Gaza, not exactly a fun
             | loving bunch.
             | 
             | Agreed. And Israel have annihilated over 50,000 Gazans. Not
             | exactly a fun loving bunch.
        
               | mupuff1234 wrote:
               | I didn't say I agree with what Israel is doing so I'm not
               | sure what the point of your comment is.
               | 
               | The truth is that there are zealots on both sides.
        
         | mef51 wrote:
         | "The civilians should be evacuated." They don't want to leave
         | and Israel uses these "evacuations" to make sure Palestinians
         | never return, as they did in 1948, 1967, etc[1][2]. This is
         | whitewashing genocide and is an extremely violent view,
         | packaged in reasonable sounding words. Israel has a long
         | documented history of using terrorism to build its state. If
         | you truly oppose terrorism I recommend starting with the books
         | I've sourced.
         | 
         | [1] The ethnic cleansing of Palestine by Ilan Pappe
         | 
         | [2] The Hundred Years' War on Palestine: A History of Settler
         | Colonialism and Resistance, 1917-2017 by Rashid Kahlidi
        
           | mjevans wrote:
           | It should be the UN, and with the express intent outlined in
           | my post above. To return them back to their country once the
           | criminals have been removed.
        
             | xp84 wrote:
             | The criminals would all line up with the civilians if it
             | came to that, and they'd also still raise all their
             | children to become the next generation of terrorists.
        
         | yoda97 wrote:
         | A two state solution is never possible when one state keeps
         | expanding with impunity, and every time the second state
         | resists it is called a terrorist state. My country resisted
         | colonization in the mid 20th century and the resistance efforts
         | were called terrorism by everyone, nobody calls them terrorists
         | now.
        
           | HappyPanacea wrote:
           | What country are you from? It is entirely possible they are
           | still terrorists you just decided as society to ignore it.
        
             | yoda97 wrote:
             | The ICC has never issued any arrest warrants for our
             | elected/appointed government officials if that's what you
             | are asking.
        
         | tmnvix wrote:
         | And I assume after this evacuation, purging, and installment of
         | a new government Israel will magically change its ways? You
         | need to address both sides to find a solution.
        
       | MPSFounder wrote:
       | Realistically, how can we uncover this type of foreign
       | interference? As in, is there any hack someone in our community
       | can perform to expose Israeli propaganda? Israel locked
       | journalists out of Ghaza, and has pretty much dominion over
       | social media in the US. How can someone remain informed or expose
       | misinformation campaigns (ideally without repercussions, which is
       | a dangerous control they have over our gov)?
        
         | JKCalhoun wrote:
         | Meta could start by being transparent when they are asked to
         | take down a post and could be transparent when they comply.
        
           | disgruntledphd2 wrote:
           | They have released this data for at least ten years at this
           | point. That's one of the sources the Human Rights group used.
        
       | ajb wrote:
       | This sort of thing has happened before in the US:
       | 
       | https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/05/how-the-robber-b...
        
       | plsbenice34 wrote:
       | Why is the word Israeli removed from the title? and Meta added?
       | Seems like quite a politically-important modification
        
         | dang wrote:
         | I did those title edits to (marginally) reduce the flamebait
         | effect of the title, in keeping with standard moderation
         | practice (see
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). Titles have
         | by far the biggest impact on discussion quality, so this is a
         | big deal. Especially when the topic is divisive.
        
           | mef51 wrote:
           | I think in this instance the perpetrator is central to the
           | story/article
        
             | zzzeek wrote:
             | speaking as someone who gets a lot of their posts flagged
             | (to the annoyance of dang), a less-inflammatory headline
             | can be less satisfying but a post that isn't flagged will
             | get a lot more traffic than one that is flagged
        
           | alistairSH wrote:
           | The entire endeavor was orchestrated by Israel - that's kinda
           | the point here. Meta didn't act on its own, as the edited
           | title would imply.
        
             | dang wrote:
             | I know, but for HN purposes, the point I made about titles
             | is the higher-order bit.
             | 
             | Threads like this, at best, waver on the edge of a hell
             | pit. If it plummets in, the discussion won't stay on HN's
             | front page anyhow. Title de-baiting is a way to support
             | having a discussion that doesn't completely suck, to the
             | extent that this is doable.
        
             | bawolff wrote:
             | Its meta's website. Its entirely in their control as to how
             | they respond to a takedown request.
        
           | instagib wrote:
           | At this point, is it feasible to implement user-submitted or
           | generated tags for submissions that can subsequently be
           | concealed?
           | 
           | Our focus is shifting towards the news aspect rather than the
           | hacking aspect, which is the primary reason for my presence
           | here.
        
             | dang wrote:
             | There are fluctuations, such as a swing towards current
             | affairs stories during turbulent times, but the basic mix
             | has been stable for years and the baseline isn't likely to
             | change. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869
             | for how far back this question goes...
             | 
             | Not that it helps, necessarily, but the people who have the
             | opposite preference to yours are complaining loudly about
             | how much they feel the current affairs stories are being
             | suppressed on HN.
             | 
             | Re tags: I've always resisted the idea of adding it to the
             | core HN site, but I do think we can do more to support
             | alternate front-ends to HN. With any luck, we can publish
             | the next version of the API this year, which should make
             | that a lot easier.
        
               | instagib wrote:
               | Least favorite anecdote: Reddit. After an introduction, a
               | friend said, "Why are you on the front page like a new
               | person?" I am auto-subscribed to the front page content
               | channels when I want to be in my subscriptions. However,
               | I miss relevant content because others overwhelm the
               | front pages.
               | 
               | I appreciate your response and the work you continue on
               | the front ends. I obtain political news content from
               | other sources, so my cumulative content feed contains a
               | significant amount of duplicate content.
        
           | square_usual wrote:
           | FWIW I support this. It's more relevant to HN to talk about
           | Meta, the big tech company, doing something wrong than a
           | nation, regardless of where you stand on this issue.
        
         | ncr100 wrote:
         | The current title (11:36 AM PST) is:
         | 
         | "Leaked Data Reveals Massive Israeli Campaign to Remove Pro-
         | Palestine Posts on Facebook and Instagram"
         | 
         | @dang IDK if this matters, nor when the title was changed (from
         | submission, to now). Just an FYI.
        
           | dang wrote:
           | Btw there's a lot more information about the moderation on
           | this post here, if you or anyone want to read about that:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43657264.
        
             | dpifke wrote:
             | It's unfortunate that turning off flags for a story
             | empowers the people who want to use this site for
             | ideological battle. "dang made an exception once for <my
             | pet topic>, so the guidelines forever more don't apply to
             | it!" There were several variants of this sentiment
             | expressed on the tomhow welcome thread.
        
               | dang wrote:
               | I'm not following the argument here, but turning off the
               | flags on a given story doesn't turn HN into a free-for-
               | all on a topic (on the contrary, we don't want too much
               | repetition of _any_ topic), and certainly the guidelines
               | continue to apply as much as anymore. More, in fact ( "
               | _Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not
               | less, as a topic gets more divisive._ " -
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html).
        
         | switch007 wrote:
         | Because you can't imply Israel is a bad actor. It's
         | politically-censored in the US, including self-censorship.
        
           | dang wrote:
           | We can't control which words people are super-reactive to in
           | titles; we can only empirically observe what they are and try
           | to dampen the effect, with the hope of making a thoughtful
           | discussion at least a little more likely.
        
             | bad_haircut72 wrote:
             | I this case you have completely changed the meaning of the
             | title though. It sounds Like Meta did this of their own
             | initiative which is a very different message.
        
               | dang wrote:
               | I don't read it that way, FWIW.
               | 
               | I think some of you are overly focusing on the title
               | instead of the overall effect of the moderator
               | interventions here, which is that the article gets more
               | attention and the story more coverage. In that sense, I'd
               | think it would be in you guys' interest to take yes for
               | an answer, much as zzzeek has here:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43657317.
        
               | jrflowers wrote:
               | I am not sure that linking to one post that agrees with
               | your decision to provide your own title for the article
               | (in contradiction to one of HN's core rules no less) in
               | order to intentionally steer discussion _away from the
               | subject of the article_ is that compelling of a way to
               | convince people that your editorial decision here was
               | correct. It certainly does nothing to address a valid
               | concern about the precedent that this sets.
               | 
               | Rather than taking on the task of manually editing
               | headlines to be more sympathetic to Israel perhaps the
               | site could implement a filter that disallows the word
               | from being used in titles or posts altogether? If that is
               | the aim, it would save you time having to answer
               | questions about it.
        
               | dang wrote:
               | > in contradiction to one of HN's core rules no less
               | 
               | There's no contradiction. The rule is " _Please use the
               | original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait._ "
               | 
               | Nor is there any attempt to steer discussion away from
               | the subject of the article. That would have been a
               | hapless attempt, had it existed, since the thread is
               | filled with such discussion.
        
         | Maken wrote:
         | The problematic point here is that Facebook is more than
         | willing to obliterate certain topics and political views when
         | requested, not which ones or by whom orders in particular.
        
       | switch007 wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | dang wrote:
         | No, what it proves is that users will flag unsubstantive
         | flamewar posts on Hacker News, regardless of the topic or the
         | commenter's position on the topic.
         | 
         | This is a good thing. Posts like your comment here break the
         | site guidelines badly*, and the users who flagged it were quite
         | correct to do so, regardless of your (or their) political
         | opinion.
         | 
         | * for example, this one: " _Comments should get more thoughtful
         | and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive._ ",
         | and this one: " _Don 't be snarky._". Can you please review
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stop doing
         | those things? We'd appreciate it.
        
       | turnsout wrote:
       | Mark needs to go
        
         | jsheard wrote:
         | I think he has a majority of the voting shares, so nobody can
         | get rid of him unfortunately. Meta is too big to fail and Zuck
         | is set to be dictator for life if he wants to be.
        
       | abeppu wrote:
       | ... so while we were all worried about TikTok, being owned by a
       | Chinese company, would be a vector for that government to push a
       | skewed/propagandized stream of content on the world, Meta has
       | already been doing it for a foreign government despite not having
       | foreign ownership.
        
       | submeta wrote:
       | Well, I'll leave this here:
       | 
       | ,,100+ Meta employees, including Head of AI Policy, confirmed as
       | ex-IDF"
       | 
       | https://thegrayzone.com/2025/04/08/100-meta-employees-ex-idf...
       | 
       | Isn't X's community lead Israeli as well?
        
         | megaman821 wrote:
         | Since service is manditory for most Isrealies, that just mean
         | the 100 Isrealies in a company of 74,000 employees and somehow
         | that is a conspiracy?
        
           | submeta wrote:
           | These are people having stronger loyalty to Israel than to
           | the US. Also, would US conpanies employ people with strong
           | ties to Russia, knowing they would suppress any criticism of
           | Russia's war in Ukraine? Apparently that's what these Meta
           | employees with strong ties to Israel did: Suppress any
           | criticism of Israel's apparent war crimes in Gaza, for which
           | there are arrest warrants from the ICC.
        
             | 9283409232 wrote:
             | > knowing they would suppress any criticism of Russia's war
             | in Ukraine?
             | 
             | This is a leap in logic. You have no idea that they would
             | know they would do this.
        
               | submeta wrote:
               | Ahh, that's why university presidents were fired because
               | they allowed students to protest against Israel's war
               | crimes in Palestine? But no Meta employee is fired for
               | suppressing criticism of war crimes?
        
               | 9283409232 wrote:
               | For all the illegal or immoral things Meta employees do
               | and do not get fired for, this is very low on the list.
        
           | smt88 wrote:
           | The US is about 0.05% Israeli, so it's not a conspiracy, but
           | Israelis are certainty a much higher proportion of Meta than
           | most other companies and countries outside of Israel.
        
             | MaxDPS wrote:
             | 100/74,000 = 0.00135 or 0.135%
        
               | submeta wrote:
               | in what positions are these 100 ex IDF soldiers? Just
               | some random frontend developers? Or overseeing community
               | management?
        
           | submeta wrote:
           | Yeah, and in _what_ positions are these 100 ex IDF soldiers?
           | Just some random frontend developers? Or overseeing community
           | management?
        
         | bradlys wrote:
         | It being only 100 seems kinda low for the size of Meta and how
         | many Israelis live in the Bay Area. There is a very large
         | contingent that lives in Palo Alto and Sunnyvale.
         | 
         | They're nowhere near as large as the Chinese and Indian
         | population but probably close to third place for largest
         | foreign born tech worker populace in SV.
        
           | submeta wrote:
           | in what positions are these 100 ex IDF soldiers? Just some
           | random frontend developers? Or overseeing community
           | management?
        
             | bradlys wrote:
             | All positions. I've worked with many devs to executives
             | that all were from Israel and had served in the IDF.
        
               | submeta wrote:
               | Then it's doubly critical. A tiny country having citizens
               | in top positions in critical media companies suppressing
               | any criticism of their governments conduct sounds like
               | accusations we make against NK or Russia.
               | 
               | You might think: Well, what does that effect the world if
               | a tiny country flattens an even tinier other region. Then
               | have a look at how Netanyahu for decades pushed for US
               | wars in the ME and is now pushing for the US starting a
               | war against Iran.
        
               | bradlys wrote:
               | You could say the same about all the Chinese and Indian
               | people who are _massively_ over-represented in these
               | companies. Go into the FB Ads org and try to find a
               | single all American team, lol. You 'll have a hard time
               | even finding one American to begin with.
        
         | submeta wrote:
         | Downvote however you like. We know how strong the influence is.
         | 
         | ,, LEAKED AUDIO OF CEO OF AIPAC Rubio, Stefanik, Waltz ... they
         | all have sth in common ... relationships with key AIPAC
         | leaders"
         | 
         | Ratcliffe, one of the first candidates I ever met as an AIPAC
         | rep ... he took the oath as CIA director, for crying out loud
         | https://x.com/TheGrayzoneNews/status/1910101143268508094
        
         | yes_really wrote:
         | Virtually all Israelis, both men and women, serve in the IDF
         | from 18 to 21 years old. So the criticism is that Meta employs
         | 100 Israelis out of its 74k US employees?
         | 
         | That's 0.1%. The Indians and Chinese immigrants cover a much
         | larger percentage. Does that mean that Meta is controlled by
         | India and China?
        
       | bazalia wrote:
       | Is it just me or is this post very low on the hacker news order
       | even though it has much more upvotes in a short time than much of
       | the posts above it.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | This is in the FAQ: see
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html#whyrank ("Why is A
         | ranked below B even though A has more points and is newer?").
         | But here's a longer answer.
         | 
         | In the case of a story like this, which has significant new
         | information (SNI) [1] on a major ongoing topic (MOT) [2], and
         | at least some hope of a substantive discussion, moderators
         | sometimes turn off the user flags on the story [3] so that it
         | can spend time on HN's front page.
         | 
         | In such cases, we usually adjust the degree to which we turn
         | off the flags so that the tug-of-war between upvotes and flags
         | isn't affected too dramatically. Usually the best way to
         | support a substantive discussion is for the story to remain on
         | HN's front page, but not in the highest few slots, where it
         | would burn much hotter.
         | 
         | Since upvotes and submission time are public data but flags
         | aren't, it can appear like a story is being downweighted when
         | in fact the opposite is the case, as with this thread. That's
         | not a rule, though--we do also downweight stories sometimes.
         | That's why the FAQ explains that you can't derive rank from
         | votes and time alone.
         | 
         | The reason moderation works this way, btw, is that HN is a
         | curated site [4] (and always has been--here's me explaining
         | this when I took over HN 11 years ago:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7494621).
         | 
         | Moderators' job is to jiggle the system out of the failure
         | modes [5] it would otherwise end up in if the software were
         | running unattended. Turning off flags on certain stories, and
         | adding downweight to other stories, are two examples. The goal
         | is the same: to support substantive discussion on interesting
         | stories, and (as a necessary condition for that) prevent the
         | site from burning too hot if we can.
         | 
         | [1]
         | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
         | 
         | [2]
         | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
         | 
         | [3]
         | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
         | 
         | [4]
         | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
         | 
         | [5]
         | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
        
       | nahuel0x wrote:
       | Just like IBM on "IBM and the Holocaust" (a must read). A
       | genocide being supported by the US companies / media just in
       | front of our noses.
        
       | nova22033 wrote:
       | >Meta's Director of Public Policy for Israel and the Jewish
       | Diaspora, Jordana Cutler, has also intervened to investigate pro-
       | Palestine content. Cutler is a former senior Israeli government
       | official and advisor to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
       | 
       | Concerning...as another billionaire would say
        
       | submeta wrote:
       | It is not only Meta suppressing any criticism of apparent Israeli
       | war crimes, for which there are ICC arrest warrants. Many
       | plattforms suppress criticism of Israel. Directly--as in the case
       | of Meta--or indirectly, by an army of hasbara bots downvoting any
       | post that criticises Israel. Even on this very platform.
        
         | tdeck wrote:
         | They really proved you wrong on this one.
        
           | garbagewoman wrote:
           | Who is "they"?
        
             | tdeck wrote:
             | When I replied to OP their post had already been flagged
             | and downvoted to nothing. I had to vouch for it as I have
             | seen the same thing.
        
       | jmyeet wrote:
       | The role of the media (including social media) is to move in
       | lockstep with US domestic and foreign policy. This has been known
       | for some time [1]. It's never as simple as the White House
       | calling up Mark Zuckerberg and saying "hey, silence X". It's
       | about a series of filters that decides who is in the media and
       | who has their thumb on the algorithmic scales, as per the famous
       | Noam Chomsky Andrew Marr interview [2] ("What I'm saying is if
       | you believed something different, you wouldn't be sitting where
       | you're sitting").
       | 
       | Noam Chomsky is a national treasure.
       | 
       | When a former Netanyahu adviser and Israeli embassy staffer
       | seemingly has the power to suppress pro-Palestinian speech on
       | Meta platforms [3], nobody should be surprised.
       | 
       | If you're a US citizen who is a journalist critical of a key US
       | ally, that ally is allowed to assassinate you without any
       | objection of repercussions [4].
       | 
       | This is also why Tiktok originally got banned in a bipartisan
       | fashion: the Apartheid Defense League director Jonathon Goldblatt
       | said (in leaked audio) "we have a Tiktok problem" [5] and weeks
       | later it was banned. Tiktok simply suppresses pro-Palestinian
       | speech less than other platforms.
       | 
       | [1]: https://chomsky.info/consent01/
       | 
       | [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvGmBSHFuj0
       | 
       | [3]: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/metas-israel-policy-
       | chief...
       | 
       | [4]: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/16/israeli-forces-
       | kil...
       | 
       | [5]: https://x.com/Roots_Action/status/1767941861866348615
        
         | cypherpunks01 wrote:
         | Hey this Chomsky guy seems pretty smart! Would be great to get
         | him on mainstream media sometime.. hah
        
       | tdeck wrote:
       | Not a surprise. I remember last year seeing that posts to
       | https://www.birdsofgaza.com/ were being blocked, and it's hard to
       | think of a more innocuous way of speaking out.
        
       | shihab wrote:
       | "Meta has complied with 94% of takedown requests issued by
       | Israel...Meta removed over 90,000 posts to comply with TDRs
       | submitted by the Israeli government in an average of 30
       | seconds...All of the Israeli government's TDRs post-October 7th
       | contain the exact same complaint text, according to the leaked
       | information, regardless of the substance of the underlying
       | content being challenged. Sources said that not a single Israeli
       | TDR describes the exact nature of the content being reported"
        
       | breppp wrote:
       | Heavily based on research by Human Rights Watch an organization
       | financed by Qatar, which also incidentally financed Hamas and has
       | close ideological backgrounds with that movement.
       | 
       | Qatar also has its own heavy human rights baggage, but money is
       | money
        
         | skyyler wrote:
         | [flagged]
        
           | dang wrote:
           | Please make your substantive points without attacking others.
           | If someone else is wrong or has a bad argument, it's enough
           | to post correct information or a better argument.
           | 
           | If you wouldn't mind reviewing
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking
           | the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be
           | grateful.
        
             | skyyler wrote:
             | I suppose I should have included a source for the 75%
             | number.
             | 
             | https://web.archive.org/web/20090722190606/http://www.hrw.o
             | r...
             | 
             | Apologies for missing the mark there.
        
         | jmathai wrote:
         | Where did you read they are funded by Qatar? Some quick
         | searching indicates that's false.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.hrw.org/financials
         | 
         | [2] https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/human-rights-
         | watch...
        
           | breppp wrote:
           | HRW was caught in the past soliciting donations from Saudis
           | in return for restricting their Middle East reporting [1]
           | 
           | Project Raven, a UAE offensive cyber operation has leaked a
           | document by the Qatar government concerning financing of HRW
           | [2][3]
           | 
           | [1] https://theintercept.com/2020/03/02/human-rights-watch-
           | took-...
           | 
           | [2] https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/middle-
           | east/1700763578-human-...
           | 
           | [3] https://www.memri.org/reports/raven-project-leaks-
           | alleged-qa...
        
             | jmathai wrote:
             | Thanks for sharing. I don't personally see how those
             | disqualify the information in the article though.
        
       | DAGdug wrote:
       | Just want to call out that the head of the trust and
       | safety/integrity division, Guy Rosen, is an Israeli citizen with
       | a strong pro-Israel bias. He's also a person of questionable
       | morals. From Wikipedia:
       | 
       | " Guy Rosen and Roi Tiger founded Onavo in 2010. In October 2013,
       | Onavo was acquired by Facebook, which used Onavo's analytics
       | platform to monitor competitors. This influenced Facebook to make
       | various business decisions, including its 2014 acquisition of
       | WhatsApp. Since the acquisition, Onavo was frequently classified
       | as being spyware, as the VPN was used to monetize application
       | usage data collected within an allegedly privacy-focused
       | environment."
       | 
       | That Meta considered his questionable ethics a feature not a bug,
       | and repeatedly promoted him, is very problematic.
        
         | frob wrote:
         | I was there during the onavo scandal. It was straight up
         | spyware. They would regularly show graphs of snapchat usage vs
         | messenger vs whatsapp and the snapchat data was explicitly
         | attributed to onovo logs.
        
       | seydor wrote:
       | Facebook's boss has repeatedly shown that he's an amoral
       | hypocrite , most blatantly after Trumps election. I m not
       | particularly sympathetic to palestinians but what's going on
       | here. Its not just Israel, facebook has succumbed to
       | authoritarian governments like Turkey in the past. The ubiquity
       | of facebook and its monopolies are directly contradicting the
       | spirit of democratic Constitutions worldwide. What's the point of
       | guaranteeing freedom of expression when a single entity/person
       | controls the attention of billions and billions of people.
       | 
       | I think we need a rethink of freedom of press laws in the age of
       | international monopolies.
        
       | bawolff wrote:
       | The missing part of this article: are the requests valid? Are
       | they actually incitements to terrorism and violence or is it just
       | a clamp down on criticism? The headline of the article implies
       | the latter but the body does not provide any evidence for that.
       | 
       | Like there is a war going on, a pretty nasty one at that. I would
       | expect there to be quite a lot of incitement to violence related
       | to that. I would expect the israeli government to be mostly
       | concerned with incitements of violence against its citizens. In
       | the context of this conflict i would expect such incitements to
       | be mostly be made by the demographics cited in the article due to
       | the nature of the conflict. The article seems like it could be
       | entirely consistent with take downs being used appropriately. It
       | needs more then this to prove its headline.
       | 
       | Heck, from this post we dont even know relative numbers. How does
       | this compare against take down requests from other groups?
        
         | janalsncm wrote:
         | If you have valid rules but in practice only enforce them
         | against a single group, then in some sense you are asking the
         | wrong question.
         | 
         | In other words, for people who assume rule enforcement is
         | supposed to be fair, they see unfair enforcement as hypocrisy.
         | However, if you just see enforcement as another tool to wield
         | against enemies, hypocrisy is irrelevant. What matters is
         | power. It's my basketball, I make the rules.
        
           | bawolff wrote:
           | > If you have valid rules but in practice only enforce them
           | against a single group
           | 
           | I'd agree. Is there any evidence that that is happening here?
           | The article reports on israeli take down requests but does
           | not report on take down requests from other groups. Meta
           | could very well be using the same rules against pro-israel
           | groups, we just dont know because the leak didn't include
           | that information.
        
         | garbagewoman wrote:
         | What would you define as "valid"
        
           | bawolff wrote:
           | I guess as "violating facebook terms of use". At some point i
           | don't think what the standard is matters that much as long as
           | its equally enforced against everyone.
           | 
           | Generally though i do think its legit for facebook to take
           | down posts advocating for violence and terrorism. Devil is in
           | the details.
        
       | xp84 wrote:
       | Edit: I'm deleting most of my post, to avoid politics part and
       | only preserving my "point"
       | 
       | Basically I'm saying: Nobody has a right to free wide
       | distribution of their thoughts on social media anyway, and also,
       | those who provide these free ad-supported platforms have many
       | reasonable motivations to remove content -- including the belief
       | that the speaker is wrong/spreading lies and propaganda. That
       | doesn't 'silence' them any more than not letting them into my
       | house silences them.
        
         | onionisafruit wrote:
         | It would be interesting to see a random sample of these posts.
         | I know any sample they released would be groomed to make them
         | look good, but it would be interesting if it were possible.
        
         | basisword wrote:
         | Fair enough, but the social media companies should be honest
         | about it. Instead they brag hypocritically about free speech.
         | 
         | I disagree with you though. These global social media platforms
         | have an incredible amount of sway over our society. As long as
         | they have that reach, they should not be allowed to distort and
         | silence.
        
       | dvdhnt wrote:
       | I suspect 90% of "pro-Palestine" posts actually means "pro-Hamas"
       | which, yeah, you can't promote terrorism of which Hamas is
       | recognized as.
        
         | yieldcrv wrote:
         | It's good to suspect that but the article distinguished
         | 
         | Although did not quantify
         | 
         | I think it isn't helpful when Israel designates all teenager
         | and older males in Gaza as Hamas militants, even their own
         | hostages because of the shares phenotypes, heritage, genetics
         | 
         | Makes consensus impossible
        
         | adhamsalama wrote:
         | Good thing nobody cares what you suspect. Try writing something
         | insightful instead.
        
       | spencerflem wrote:
       | Judges have now ruled that suspected "expected beliefs" that are
       | "otherwise lawful" is grounds for deportation, if those suspected
       | thoughts are "antisemitic" (read- supportive of peace in
       | Palestine).
       | 
       | They are literally arresting and deporting people for suspected
       | thoughts.
       | 
       | Student visas are being denied based on social media posts.
       | 
       | This is fascism.
        
         | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
         | > Judges have now ruled that suspected "expected beliefs" that
         | are "otherwise lawful" is grounds for deportation, if those
         | suspected thoughts are "antisemitic"
         | 
         | Do you have a link to what you are referring to?
        
           | spencerflem wrote:
           | Quote from Marco Rubio (confirmed 99-0 in the Senate)
           | 
           | "Rubio said that while Khalil's "past, current or expected
           | beliefs, statements, or associations that are otherwise
           | lawful," the provision allows the secretary of state alone to
           | "personally determine" whether he should remain in the
           | country." https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mahmoud-
           | khalil-deported...
           | 
           | The article is a day old, the judges just affirmed that Rubio
           | is allowed to do this today
        
             | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
             | Thanks for the information. FWIW, I think this is total
             | bullshit and fascism, but your comments aren't telling the
             | whole story.
             | 
             | The most important thing to point out is that "the judges"
             | in this case was actually a single immigration judge.
             | Immigration judges belong to the executive branch, not the
             | judiciary. I agree this law that says that the Secretary of
             | State can essentially just deport anyone they want can't be
             | squared with the constitutional rights of freedom of speech
             | and due process. But that wasn't really this immigration
             | judge's determination to make, i.e. questioning the
             | constitutionality of the law that Rubio is using to deport
             | Khalil. There is a separate case going on in federal court
             | that should address that topic.
             | 
             | This article has more info: https://archive.vn/D890d
        
               | spencerflem wrote:
               | In a different deportation case they just defied a
               | supreme court ruling - https://www.theguardian.com/us-
               | news/2025/apr/11/trump-deport...
               | 
               | Didn't realize that the judge in the linked one was an
               | immigration judge and not a judiciary judge thanks for
               | the clarification
        
       | herf wrote:
       | This is a _really_ hard problem. Just consider that there are
       | ~150 Muslims for every Jew worldwide. In the USA it 's the
       | reverse - 2:1 in favor of Jews, concentrated in particular
       | geographic areas.
       | 
       | Imagine what it means to get ranking right here - if you let just
       | 1% of the international population into the USA ranking system,
       | you have a majority in favor of Palestine, and of course these
       | ideas will spread in communities without a lot of people who can
       | represent Jewish history. It's clear to me _why_ this happens,
       | but fixing in an algorithmic but fair way is also extremely
       | difficult.
        
         | wesselbindt wrote:
         | I think there's an erroneous implicit assumption in your
         | reasoning, namely that to be Zionist is equivalent to be
         | Jewish, and to be anti-zionist is to be Muslim (otherwise, why
         | would you be talking about Jew:Muslim ratios). The fact of the
         | matter is that not every Zionist* is Jewish (in fact, the vast
         | majority of Zionists are christian), and vice versa not every
         | Jewish person is a Zionist (Jewish voice for peace, the ultra
         | orthodox, etc).
         | 
         | But even beyond that, I think engaging in censorship to hide an
         | ethnic cleansing is an affront to humanity.
         | 
         | * Here, I'm taking Zionism to mean to be in support of the way
         | Israel has formed and continued to form in the past 77 or so
         | years. I am aware that there are many different interpretations
         | of Zionism (to illustrate the breadth; Noam Chomsky considered
         | himself a Zionist), but this particular interpretation is the
         | one that is relevant to this conversation.
        
       | Cyph0n wrote:
       | "According to internal communications reviewed by Drop Site, as
       | recently as March, Cutler actively instructed employees of the
       | company to search for and review content mentioning Ghassan
       | Kanafani, an Arab novelist considered to be a pioneer of
       | Palestinian literature."
       | 
       | So this person is actively thinking about a Palestinian
       | revolutionary that was assassinated by Mossad over half a century
       | ago, and is using their position to push for internal censorship
       | of him accordingly.
       | 
       | Imagine if a Palestinian employee at Meta suggested censoring
       | mentions of past members of Haganah.
        
       | Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote:
       | Oh dear! Now the boot is pressing on you, Human Rights Watch, it
       | isn't so fun.
        
       | khaledh wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | dang wrote:
         | > Israel is such a bitch.
         | 
         | I realize that this topic produces legitimately strong
         | feelings, but you can't post like this here, no matter how
         | right you are or you feel you are. It just makes everything
         | worse, and you owe this community better if you're
         | participating in it.
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
       | yes_really wrote:
       | It is perfectly reasonable for Meta to remove posts supporting
       | terrorist organizations or glorifying terrorist attacks like
       | October 7th or 9/11. I hope we can all agree on that.
       | 
       | That title gives a nondescript "pro-Palestine posts" to try to
       | imply those are innocent posts suffering censorship. That's hard
       | to believe. Mahmoud Khalil, the ex Columbia student famous for
       | being deported, has made posts justifying the "armed resistance"
       | of Hamas and was also disingenuously described as simply "pro-
       | Palestine" by some news outlets.
        
       | morkalork wrote:
       | Was anyone else confused reading the title? At first pass I was
       | asking myself "metadata from what?" then figured out oh not
       | metadata, data from Meta.
        
       | yodsanklai wrote:
       | And then Zuckerberg says he's all about free speech, even mocking
       | Europe as not being free-speech enough
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-04-11 23:00 UTC)