Facebook’s abuse reporting system is easily abused

When I wrote about Collateral Murder yesterday, I linked to collateralmurder.com. And I’m glad I did; it’s one of a number of URLs that links to the site Wikileaks launched, and it’s not the one that Facebook immediately blocked.

Earlier this morning, people started noticing that if they were to post a link to collateralmurder.org on Facebook, they would be told that “some content in this message has been reported as abusive by Facebook users.” Indeed, it looks as if a number of related options have since been flagged.

And if Facebook’s “blocked content” messages are to be taken at face value – which is a phrase, by the way, that I can only assume tech writers the world over have already used as a headline for a great many articles about Facebook’s dwindling credibility – then the links haven’t necessarily been blocked because Facebook itself has a problem with them. The reason we can’t post them, after all, is because a certain number of users have labeled them “abusive.” For all we know, the people who work at Facebook aren’t even aware that these links are being blocked yet.

Now, I don’t know why the users in question flagged the links as abusive. Frankly, it’s beside the point. If I were to guess, I’d say that a bunch of conservative users, organized or otherwise, decided to flag the links because they felt that dissent against the government and/or military is irresponsible and unpatriotic, even though the opposite is true. Then again, it’s just as likely that a bunch of people saw a link with the word “murder” in it, and decided that the possibility that somebody’s kid might click it was reason enough to prevent anyone on Facebook from clicking it.

Regardless of the reason, the “blocked content” alerts indicate that a small but vocal minority has the power to dictate what can and can’t be posted on Facebook. And if that’s the case, then Facebook has either intentionally or incompetently set itself up to be a place where conservatives who are too timid and/or uneducated to successfully deal with the real world can easily and successfully ensure that nobody ever has to, whether they like it or not.

If that’s the way that Facebook has deliberately chosen to operate, then I guess the good news for the Moral Majority types is that Facebook is intended to be a pretty close approximation of the wholesome, restrictive, immature society that they’ve tried in vain for years to develop in the real world. And if that’s the case, then I can’t help but wonder aloud why fully half the photos on the site, by my exaggerated estimate, feature drunk teenage cleavage.

Either way, I guess it’s a good thing that everyone online who’s serious about sharing information quickly, freely and responsibly has already moved on to Twitter. Each new day seems to offer up a new indictment of Facebook’s privacy policies or flawed methodology, and as a member, I hate to throw another one on the pile. But if you’re using Facebook to share potentially sensitive but nonetheless important information, then you really ought to be aware of this sort of thing – and it wouldn’t hurt if you wondered aloud why Facebook’s abuse reporting system is either deeply flawed or intentionally restrictive.

Meanwhile, as long as we’re talking about the Collateral Murder video, an Iraq veteran has posted some concerns about the video and its presentation. I’ll admit that I had some worries about the video from the start, knowing that the version I was seeing had been cut down from its full length. There are some evidently valid criticisms here, and hopefully the folks at Wikileaks will address them.

But beyond that, I hope the parties involved can agree that frank engagement with the facts and evidence involved trumps a blanket labeling of anything involved as abusive. That’s how functioning democracies are supposed to deal with their failings – and that’s how grownups are supposed to deal with the things that trouble them.

Posted in Uncategorized