Playing Fair?
![The controversy over the Facebook ban continues. One Facebook user, Saad Warriach is particularly upset his account has permanently been disabled by Facebook and the decision is final. Warriach, a student at IBA, saw the 'Draw Mohammed Day' group on May 18, 2010. Angered and insulted, he decided to prove his point by creating a page called 'H | T L E R.' The page was taken down and his account disabled sometime between May 19 and early morning May 21. “I was aware of the terms and conditions and knew they [Facebook] would take some sort of action. I didn't think they would delete my account,” said Warriach. He received an email from Facebook explaining why “After reviewing your situation, we have determined that you violated our Statement of Rights and Responsibilities. One of Facebook's main priorities is the comfort and safety of our users. “We do not tolerate hate speech. Targeting people based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, or disease is a serious violation of our standards and has resulted in the permanent loss of your account. "We will not be able to reactivate your account for any reason. This decision is final.”According to Warriach he posted one picture of Adolf Hitler and three pictures of Paolo di Canio - an Italian football player who was banned and fined by Fifa for his right-hand salute during football matches. In the information section of the page he wrote “To all those who think they can ridicule Islam in the name of freedom of expression and yet punish those who speak of the genius of Hitler” Over 30 people joined the group within an hour and Warriach is unable to confirm the numbers of the group before his account was disabled. Admittedly, the group was offensive and insensitive, and was rightly taken down. However, a statement from Facebook on May 20 states“While some kinds of comments and content may be upsetting for someone - criticism of a certain culture, country, religion, lifestyle, or political ideology, for example - that alone is not a reason to remove the discussion.“We strongly believe that Facebook users have the freedom to express their opinions, and we dont typically take down content, groups or pages that speak out against countries, religions, political entities, or ideas.”The statement also noted that “Nazi content is illegal in some countries” but at the same time said “that does not mean it should be removed entirely from Facebook.”If that were true, how is it that Warriach's (given that his side of the story is accurate) account was disabled when his page could have been censored and blocked in certain countries, or just taken down completely? Why is Facebook disabling accounts at its discretion when it refused to take action when the 'Draw Mohammed Day' group was reported as offensive by thousands of Muslims across the world? Both the groups are equally distasteful and affect thousands of people across the world, which is why free speech and hate speech should not be confused - the grey area differentiating the two is murky and must be treaded carefully. Facebook should have treated the two groups in the same context, that it is highly offensive to those concerned, and their decision to take action or inaction should have been the same. Don't get me wrong, the debate is not over whether people of Jewish descent are given a preferential treatment while the same isn't meted out to the Muslim community. Far from it, the debate is about policy and its implementation across the board. Maybe the team at Facebook needs to re-evaluate their terms and conditions in order for it to be known more for its popularity among networking sites rather than being known as the controversial website that doesn't play fair.](https://i.dawn.com/archives/2010/Website Pakistan/3553facebook_screen_608.jpg){kind=link}
The controversy over the Facebook ban continues. One Facebook user, Saad Warriach is particularly upset his account has permanently been disabled by Facebook and the decision is final.
Warriach, a student at IBA, saw the 'Draw Mohammed Day' group on May 18, 2010. Angered and insulted, he decided to prove his point by creating a page called 'H | T L E R.' The page was taken down and his account disabled sometime between May 19 and early morning May 21. “I was aware of the terms and conditions and knew they [Facebook] would take some sort of action. I didn't think they would delete my account,” said Warriach. He received an email from Facebook explaining why
“After reviewing your situation, we have determined that you violated our Statement of Rights and Responsibilities. One of Facebook's main priorities is the comfort and safety of our users.
“We do not tolerate hate speech. Targeting people based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, or disease is a serious violation of our standards and has resulted in the permanent loss of your account.
"We will not be able to reactivate your account for any reason. This decision is final.”
According to Warriach he posted one picture of Adolf Hitler and three pictures of Paolo di Canio - an Italian football player who was banned and fined by Fifa for his right-hand salute during football matches. In the information section of the page he wrote “To all those who think they can ridicule Islam in the name of freedom of expression and yet punish those who speak of the genius of Hitler” Over 30 people joined the group within an hour and Warriach is unable to confirm the numbers of the group before his account was disabled.
Admittedly, the group was offensive and insensitive, and was rightly taken down. However, a statement from Facebook on May 20 states
“While some kinds of comments and content may be upsetting for someone - criticism of a certain culture, country, religion, lifestyle, or political ideology, for example - that alone is not a reason to remove the discussion.
“We strongly believe that Facebook users have the freedom to express their opinions, and we dont typically take down content, groups or pages that speak out against countries, religions, political entities, or ideas.”
The statement also noted that “Nazi content is illegal in some countries” but at the same time said “that does not mean it should be removed entirely from Facebook.”
If that were true, how is it that Warriach's (given that his side of the story is accurate) account was disabled when his page could have been censored and blocked in certain countries, or just taken down completely? Why is Facebook disabling accounts at its discretion when it refused to take action when the 'Draw Mohammed Day' group was reported as offensive by thousands of Muslims across the world? Both the groups are equally distasteful and affect thousands of people across the world, which is why free speech and hate speech should not be confused - the grey area differentiating the two is murky and must be treaded carefully. Facebook should have treated the two groups in the same context, that it is highly offensive to those concerned, and their decision to take action or inaction should have been the same.
Don't get me wrong, the debate is not over whether people of Jewish descent are given a preferential treatment while the same isn't meted out to the Muslim community. Far from it, the debate is about policy and its implementation across the board.
Maybe the team at Facebook needs to re-evaluate their terms and conditions in order for it to be known more for its popularity among networking sites rather than being known as the controversial website that doesn't play fair.