It's ok to be angry about capitalism

[The Rogue Wolf]

The decision to remove posts rests with the company. Not the fact checkers. So if you consider this to be "censorship" to begin with, this act doesn't target the body responsible for the censoring. They literally cannot remove posts they tag.

He knows they can't remove posts. He's crying "censorship" because fact-checkers prevent his lies from being considered as valid as the actual truth.

 

[XsjadoBlayde]

Gotta love being talked down to by fox news as a poor person

 

[Phoenixmgs]

He knows they can't remove posts. He's crying "censorship" because fact-checkers prevent his lies from being considered as valid as the actual truth.

Community notes does the same thing but without the censorship... What's your point then?

 

[Silvanus]

Do you agree censorship is bad regardless on who removes them?

Depends what you mean by "censorship". I'm a-ok with removing violent incitement, racism, libel.

But this question has nothing to do with Zuckerberg's decision to can fact-checkers, who were uninvolved in removing fact-checked posts at all.