• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Facebook nukes Tim Naokes LCHF group...

Someone seems to be feeling a little threatened perhaps. I have a feeling that this will backfire on Fb big time.
 
Any food corp selling foods that would be financially affected by such a large group following would be happy to see that go.
 
What I find shocking is that the manner they deplatform the entire community, with no warning, discussion etc... I would have thought this kind of action applies to a known supremacist, terrorist group etc... guess low carbs is getting far too dangerous...

So much for freedom of information...
 
Wikipedia is doing much the same.. removing reference to Doctors who question statin therapy.. Sources of information now need to be chosen with extreme care. Even newspapers are taking "bribes" to publish stories with a certain world view.. worying for the future. 1984 here we come...
 
kokhongw said:
What I find shocking is that the manner they deplatform the entire community, with no warning, discussion etc... I would have thought this kind of action applies to a known supremacist, terrorist group etc... guess low carbs is getting far too dangerous...

So much for freedom of information...
Click to expand...

You are right, it's censorship. It might be dangerous to corporations profit margins maybe, but low carb isn't going to be stopped because it is so successful. And that will continue to grow.
 
If this is true then I am really shocked and have no idea on what grounds it could be justified. I believe that very few things should be banned from our 'town squares' of social media even the very bad ideas should be aired if only that they can be debated.
I certainly want google, FB etc. to decide what is 'dangerous' or worse still, Mayor Khan (TFL's ludicrous attempt to ban high fat/sugar/salt foods) but the more pernicious aspect of censorship is that people end up censoring themselves for fear of being de-platformed/de-mobnetised or even publicly shamed in some way.
Is Zukerberg a vegan or do the 7th Day Adventists buy lots of advertising? Sounds like a conspiracy theory(see Mr Gary Fetke and his wife on this topic) and thankfully at least Prof Noaks' is still permitted to be on YouTube....Thanks for sharing this.
 
Mike D said:
You do or you don't?
Click to expand...
OOPS
Do NOT want lowly paid customer service folks looking for the wrong words/phrases in any posts (I believe his is how things are done now and also is why those companies are reluctant to agree to taking responsibility for censorship). Even it were a desirable outcome it is difficult to automate censorship.
 
bulkbiker said:
Wikipedia is doing much the same.. removing reference to Doctors who question statin therapy.. Sources of information now need to be chosen with extreme care. Even newspapers are taking "bribes" to publish stories with a certain world view.. worying for the future. 1984 here we come...
Click to expand...
Mr. Orwell was a prophet with all this wasn't he?
 
bulkbiker said:
Wikipedia is doing much the same.. removing reference to Doctors who question statin therapy.. Sources of information now need to be chosen with extreme care. Even newspapers are taking "bribes" to publish stories with a certain world view.. worying for the future. 1984 here we come...
Click to expand...

Orwell wrote 1984 as a warning but it seems to be used these days as an instruction manual it would appear.
 
JohnEGreen said:
I don't get it there are still a load of Banting diet pages and groups accessible on facebook why just this one pulled.
Click to expand...
Could be the numbers, 1.6 million members. No satisfactory reason given and no warning either. A bit draconian at best considering some of the stuff that Fb seems happy to tolerate.
 
There is a Twitter post that says they have been targeted with thousands of complaints over the past few weeks. "People" were complaining about them giving medical advice which they actually do not do.

Sorry, editing to day FB got the complaints.
 
I don't do Facebook or Twitter (or any of those things) but do they not check that complaints are valid, or do they just accept them verbatim? A hacker could write a program to send multiple complaints very easily..... put that program onto several computers and there ya go - sufficient complaints to warrant closure (if the source isn't checked in some way).
 
Back
Top