Facebook Reveals It Removed 2.5 Million Pieces Of "Hate Speech"

In the aftermath of the recent Congressional Kangaroo Court in which Mark Zuckerberg had to explain to various House Reps and Senators why 85% of them were recipients of Facebook's generous donations,  the company has been forced to inject some more transparency into its operations, and open the books, so to say, and this morning, for the first time, Facebook published its enforcement numbers for the first time, three weeks after the company published the internal guidelines its uses to enforce its Community Standards.

The first report of its kind, covers Facebook's enforcement efforts between October 2017 to March 2018, and covers six areas:

  • graphic violence,
  • adult nudity and sexual activity,
  • terrorist propaganda,
  • hate speech,
  • spam,
  • fake accounts.

As part of today's disclosure, Facebook's numbers show i) How much content people saw that violates FB standards; ii) How much content was removed; and iii) How much content was detected proactively using technology — before people who use Facebook reported it.

Facebook also reported that 85% of U.S. law enforcement data requests from July to December 2017 produced some data, when the company received 32,742 total requests on 53,625 users/accounts in 2H 2017.

So, as part of its effort in showing the public "how much bad stuff is out there" here is what Facebook reported:

  • We took down 837 million pieces of spam in Q1 2018 — nearly 100% of which we found and flagged before anyone reported it; and
  • The key to fighting spam is taking down the fake accounts that spread it. In Q1, we disabled about 583 million fake accounts — most of which were disabled within minutes of registration. This is in addition to the millions of fake account attempts we prevent daily from ever registering with Facebook. Overall, we estimate that around 3 to 4% of the active Facebook accounts on the site during this time period were still fake.
  • We took down 21 million pieces of adult nudity and sexual activity in Q1 2018 — 96% of which was found and flagged by our technology before it was reported. Overall, we estimate that out of every 10,000 pieces of content viewed on Facebook, 7 to 9 views were of content that violated our adult nudity and pornography standards.
  • For graphic violence, we took down or applied warning labels to about 3.5 million pieces of violent content in Q1 2018 — 86% of which was identified by our technology before it was reported to Facebook.

But the most problematic category for Facebook remains hate speech, where the company admits that "our technology still doesn’t work that well and so it needs to be checked by our review teams."

And since "hate speech" means whatever one decide it should mean, it is here that wholesale censorship will take place, in the form of blanket muting or the more subtle "shadow banning" which Facebook has repeatedly used in the past to ban conservatives.

Here Facebook reveals that "We removed 2.5 million pieces of hate speech in Q1 2018 — 38% of which was flagged by our technology."

This means that 62% of the "hate speech" that Facebook took down was the result of complaints by outside readers who found the content of said "hate speech" unpleasant or disagreeable and demanded it be taken down. One wonders, as we proceed down this road, how long until every new piece of content is flagged as "hate speech" and is eventually taken down leading to a feed that is totally devoid of any intellectual opposition; one also wonders how much it will cost Facebook to hire the thousands of arbiters who decide subjectively just what is "hate speech."

Finally, in the spirit of openness, we hope Facebook will reveal examples of what it classified as "hate speech" which it then removed, especially in light of growing complaints that Facebook has become nothing more than a 1st Amendment filter of non-liberal opinions. That said, we won't be holding our breath.


Ignatius Joe Davola Tue, 05/15/2018 - 11:07 Permalink

What exactly constitutes a "piece" of hate speech?

Can one buy them separately or are they bundled?

Is Zuckerberg just tossing 'em?  Maybe there's a lucrative secondary market.  Maybe Zuck is just lying to us and he's making yet another fortune on the side recycling our hate speech, peddling it in the Israel or some such.

In reply to by Joe Davola

Never One Roach Rex Andrus Tue, 05/15/2018 - 12:09 Permalink

Sadly, the far left controlled FB will not go away any time soon. Almost everything is linked to it these days esp to "sign in" to various sites.

I am normally against gubmint regulation, but there's no doubt this far left biased company (that considers anyone who disagrees with their leftist propaganda) as "hate speech" should be regulated.

In reply to by Rex Andrus

Arctic Frost Never One Roach Tue, 05/15/2018 - 21:32 Permalink


I am Conservative, I am the face of hate speech. The more they ban us the more evidence they give us of to show our friends that “I am” what they define as hate speech. Nothing seems to work better on my liberal buddies than to point out the left considers me a Nazi, racist, white supremist, homophobic hater. They all say, Well, we don’t mean you! I reply, I am Conservative, I am the face of hate speech.

In reply to by Never One Roach

headless blogger Angry Panda Tue, 05/15/2018 - 11:37 Permalink

They are really on a roll lately, aren't they...

Google is just as bad if not worse. I remember a few years ago, before Google destroyed the Search engines, you could put anything in a search bar and come up with a REAL diverse set of quarry responses from all sides. That is how I discovered so many super good Alternative media sites. But, no more....you will only get the same websites....all part of MSM. 


Jordan Peterson says that the Jews have high IQs so they deserve to have these positions of power and leadership. However, from my reading, Jews (Ashekanazi) have a higher propensity to Psychopathy as well. A high IQ does not always equate to someone who is fair and moral.

In reply to by Angry Panda

glenlloyd Angry Panda Tue, 05/15/2018 - 14:02 Permalink

So this is what it's come to? A for profit biz that pretends it's biz model is not what it is and that the so-called data access that it sold to Analytica isn't actually what they sell?

I saw a commercial for FB recently on the TV and it really tried to paint the problem as being not from FB, as not something that FB is participating in, kind of like an outside force that FB is actually battling? Really? You expect me to believe that peddling Russian election interference (DNC), hate speech and user data abuse (Analytica) are not something FB has promoted?

For starters the hate speech patrol is doing nothing but eliminating opinion contrary to what FB or Fuckerburger says is truth, so if you're not a crying Dem victim then you get filtered. Second, the DNC / Hillary are the touchstone for the original Russian influence meme, so if you don't believe that or speak to that being truth you get shut down.

And finally, the whole idea that Analytica did anything beyond what others did with FB data, when they purchased access to it is idiotic. The only difference is that Analytica was a conservative research firm and FB didn't like that it's product got used that way. In fact FB now refuses to acknowledge that it wasn't that Analytica did anything different than anyone else. They just say it was abuse, which is a load of bullshit.

I've said for years get off this FB stink wagon, I just hope it becomes clear to people what they're actually doing with what's getting posted, after all, it's a free service with a biz model to sell your shit to other people. If you willingly show up it's your own fault.

In reply to by Angry Panda