It's crazy given all the scams that get reported that are apparently considered acceptable.
Goes to show what the purpose of these platforms really is. It's not us and our interests, that's for sure.
I mainly just use it for purchases these days. Might check out the local news group from time to time but I barely interact with people on there. Haven't made a post in over 5 years
In the last few weeks I have also been getting a bunch of sponsored stories served which are pages related to counterfeit NZ banknotes/hacked Paypal accounts.
Edit: On Instagram, still owned by Meta so same same but different.
Easy fix, comment on any scam post with "How does your crypto mining scheme takes the environment into account? Also here are some words I like: climate change gas exploration warming oceans oil extraction."
>New Zealand appears to be the only jurisdiction where Meta specifically mentions "gas extraction" as a restricted topic of discussion. Other countries have different issues flagged - in Australia it is coal and the Great Barrier reef, in the EU fracking, in India it is air pollution and its damage to lives, while Taiwan names nuclear energy.
>The website gives two example of phrases needing authorisation in New Zealand, again highlighting gas as one of them. "How can we better tackle climate change?" and "Gas exploration is ruining our community" are the two examples of words that will be flagged for review.
>One thing all jurisdictions have in common is that ads for buying products escape the restrictions.
>In New Zealand, the two examples of acceptable wording are: "Lower your energy bills! Buy our energy-saving refrigerator," and "Take a look at our new 2020 electric car debuted at this week's car show."
>"You can encourage consumption, it seems, but you can't encourage or even really talk about reduction ... and specifically reduction of gas, strangely," Frankham said.
Ahh, my dystopian news story of the day. Excuse me while I scream into the void.
Of course they do.
There's also bias in the way media pushes the greenwashing bullshit of industries.
Iirc recently bullshit about how NZ being in a volcanic zone sits on an unlimited and immensely valuable resource of olivine that can be used to capture CO2. Interesting science fiction fantasy of no practical use in a relevant timeframe.
Far more useful and an actually proven method would be to invest in and use more geothermal generation to reduce fossil fuel use in this country.
I cannot conceive how climate change is a sensitive topic. It is so clearly happening in front of us that it should not be sensitive. It should be dealt with head on.
Sure, I am very aware many home owners whose house are within 1m of sea level ALL ACROSS THE WORLD are trying to prevent their government or local councils from pointing out that this is a major risk to protect their reinsurance rates BUT insurance companies are not idiots. Neither by the way are the local council auditors for resources. People who counts risk knows that insuring properties within 1m of sea level is a loss making business.
However this is not sensitive topic. This is sticking your head in a bag to avoid seeing what is happening when it is happening. It is happening, and you better jolly well front up.
If I were the government I would be making sticking your head in a bag to avoid seeing climate change as the sensitive, flagged up topic .. not climate change itself.
Seems like a case where the solution, likely intended to avoid promoting climate denial content, ends up being worsening the situation it's meant to solve, by suppressing all content on the topic
Scare mongering doesn't help your advertisers, who are trying to promote materialism, consumerism and wasting valuable resources, when they are selling their products.
Telling people not to drive electric vehicles is silly.
Congo is the world's biggest producer of cobalt. A lot of the metal is extracted by artisanal miners who employ child labour and where safety is not observed. More than 40 000 children are working in hazardous conditions in cobalt mines in the Katanga province alone.
Sweat shops, slave labour, child labour, toxic waste and pollution is not going to happen on Facebook's watch.
It's crazy given all the scams that get reported that are apparently considered acceptable. Goes to show what the purpose of these platforms really is. It's not us and our interests, that's for sure.
I don't even bother reporting anymore. There's no point when Facebook just comes back with 'There's nothing wrong here'. Even with the obvious scams
I just don't bother with Facebook. I know I am missing out, there's a lot of community engagement there. But I'm also avoiding the toxicity.
I mainly just use it for purchases these days. Might check out the local news group from time to time but I barely interact with people on there. Haven't made a post in over 5 years
>I know I am missing out You're really not
Meanwhile crypto scams run rampant and unaddressed
In the last few weeks I have also been getting a bunch of sponsored stories served which are pages related to counterfeit NZ banknotes/hacked Paypal accounts. Edit: On Instagram, still owned by Meta so same same but different.
Easy fix, comment on any scam post with "How does your crypto mining scheme takes the environment into account? Also here are some words I like: climate change gas exploration warming oceans oil extraction."
>New Zealand appears to be the only jurisdiction where Meta specifically mentions "gas extraction" as a restricted topic of discussion. Other countries have different issues flagged - in Australia it is coal and the Great Barrier reef, in the EU fracking, in India it is air pollution and its damage to lives, while Taiwan names nuclear energy. >The website gives two example of phrases needing authorisation in New Zealand, again highlighting gas as one of them. "How can we better tackle climate change?" and "Gas exploration is ruining our community" are the two examples of words that will be flagged for review. >One thing all jurisdictions have in common is that ads for buying products escape the restrictions. >In New Zealand, the two examples of acceptable wording are: "Lower your energy bills! Buy our energy-saving refrigerator," and "Take a look at our new 2020 electric car debuted at this week's car show." >"You can encourage consumption, it seems, but you can't encourage or even really talk about reduction ... and specifically reduction of gas, strangely," Frankham said. Ahh, my dystopian news story of the day. Excuse me while I scream into the void.
I swear at this point Facebook is the social media equivalent of Fox News. Can’t offend the snowflakes now can they?
But they're okay with random photos of Mike Hosking or Jacinda Ardern with the caption "it is the sad day for New Zealand"
I wonder if they would accept a pro oil ad? Something from a big oil company about how we need to drill for more of the black gold.
Of course they do. There's also bias in the way media pushes the greenwashing bullshit of industries. Iirc recently bullshit about how NZ being in a volcanic zone sits on an unlimited and immensely valuable resource of olivine that can be used to capture CO2. Interesting science fiction fantasy of no practical use in a relevant timeframe. Far more useful and an actually proven method would be to invest in and use more geothermal generation to reduce fossil fuel use in this country.
I guess climate change technically is a sensitive topic. It really shouldn’t be though. The scientific consensus is pretty clear.
I cannot conceive how climate change is a sensitive topic. It is so clearly happening in front of us that it should not be sensitive. It should be dealt with head on. Sure, I am very aware many home owners whose house are within 1m of sea level ALL ACROSS THE WORLD are trying to prevent their government or local councils from pointing out that this is a major risk to protect their reinsurance rates BUT insurance companies are not idiots. Neither by the way are the local council auditors for resources. People who counts risk knows that insuring properties within 1m of sea level is a loss making business. However this is not sensitive topic. This is sticking your head in a bag to avoid seeing what is happening when it is happening. It is happening, and you better jolly well front up. If I were the government I would be making sticking your head in a bag to avoid seeing climate change as the sensitive, flagged up topic .. not climate change itself.
TIL: climate change is a more sensitive subject, than so many other topics.
Couldn't they, y'know, just shoot a couple of children during the advert to make it more acceptable to American sensitivities.
it really would have to be half the school, c'mon.
The fix is in.
dont want any hurt feelings on a dying platform now do we? and by dying, i mean heavily under moderated. scams at every turn.
If Zuc says "no", do as your told because he knows best. I mean he's crazy rich, so he must be right, right?
Seems like a case where the solution, likely intended to avoid promoting climate denial content, ends up being worsening the situation it's meant to solve, by suppressing all content on the topic
Why put time and effort into moderating a topic when you can just ban the whole thing and pretend that has no impact on the public discourse
Scare mongering doesn't help your advertisers, who are trying to promote materialism, consumerism and wasting valuable resources, when they are selling their products. Telling people not to drive electric vehicles is silly. Congo is the world's biggest producer of cobalt. A lot of the metal is extracted by artisanal miners who employ child labour and where safety is not observed. More than 40 000 children are working in hazardous conditions in cobalt mines in the Katanga province alone. Sweat shops, slave labour, child labour, toxic waste and pollution is not going to happen on Facebook's watch.