Facebook frustrates advertisers as boycott over hate speech kicks off

By Sheila Dang and Katie Paul

 

FILE PHOTO: The Facebook logo is displayed on a mobile phone in this picture illustration taken December 2, 2019. REUTERS/Johanna Geron/Illustration/File Photo

 

NEW YORK/SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Advertisements for more than 400 brands including Coca-Cola and Starbucks are due to vanish from Facebook on Wednesday, after the failure of last-ditch talks to stop a boycott over hate speech on the site.

 

U.S. civil rights groups have enlisted the multinationals to help pressure the social media giant into taking concrete steps to block hate speech in the wake of the death of George Floyd and amid a national reckoning over racism.

 

Facebook executives including Carolyn Everson, vice president of global business solutions, and Neil Potts, public policy director, held at least two meetings with advertisers on Tuesday, the eve of the planned one-month boycott, three sources who participated in the calls told Reuters.

 

But the executives offered no new details on how they would tackle hate speech, the sources said. Instead, they pointed back to recent press releases, frustrating advertisers on the calls who believe those plans do not go far enough.

 

"It's simply not moving," said one executive at a major ad agency of the conversations.

 

Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg has agreed to meet with the organizers of the boycott, a spokeswoman said late Tuesday.

 

U.S. civil rights groups including the Anti-Defamation League, NAACP and Color of Change started the "Stop Hate for Profit" campaign after the death of Floyd, a Black man who died under the knee of a white police officer last month.

 

The groups outlined 10 demands for Facebook including allowing people who experience severe harassment to speak with a Facebook employee and giving refunds to brands whose ads show up next to offensive content that is later removed.

 

Facebook said earlier this week it would submit to an audit of its hate speech controls, adding to plans to label newsworthy content that would otherwise violate its policies, following similar practices at other social media platforms such as Twitter Inc.

 

One digital ad agency representative who participated in a call on Tuesday said Facebook executives referred repeatedly to the audit, without offering additional concessions.

 

Facebook executives have reached out to chief executives, board members and chief marketing officers of major advertisers to talk them out of the boycott, two people briefed on the discussions told Reuters. All the sources requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record.

 

ADVERTISING TEST

 

The boycott will be a test for advertisers on how to reach billions of consumers without relying on the largest social media platform in the world, an executive at a major ad agency said.

 

Companies that run ads in order to promote their brand image rather than to make direct sales are less beholden to Facebook. Many of these, including the multinational advertisers who have joined up with the boycott, will begin to plot how they can achieve the same goals without Facebook, the executive said.

 

For Facebook, the boycott is unlikely to have a big financial impact. The top 100 brands on Facebook in 2019 likely brought in only 6% of Facebook's total $70 billion in annual revenue, according to a Morningstar research note citing Pathmatics data, which measures most types of advertising on the platform. Facebook said last year its top 100 advertisers accountED for less than 20% of total ad revenue.

 

News of the boycott wiped away $56 billion from Facebook's market capitalization after an 8% drop in its stock on Friday. But shares recovered 3% on Tuesday and are actually trading 8% higher year to date.

 

ZUCKBERG PRESENCE

 

Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg last week asked to meet with the campaign organizers along with Chief Product Officer Chris Cox, Zuckerberg's long-time friend, who returned to Facebook this month after resigning over the company's direction last year.

 

The civil rights groups insisted Zuckerberg also be at the table, with Anti-Defamation League Chief Executive Jonathan Greenblatt noting that as CEO, chairman and the company's largest shareholder, "he is the ultimate authority."

 

The Facebook spokeswoman said late Tuesday that the company had confirmed that Zuckerberg would join the proposed meeting.

 

"We're waiting to hear back and look forward to the opportunity to continue the dialogue,” she said.

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-07-01

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

F-U FB.????

What exactly is "hate speech" ?

well you can all blame the do-gooders for this and the way the world has become. 

Allen's want's to change the name of ' choko babies '  from now on......    absolutely pathetic.

 

If I ever see or hear a BLM in my street i will certainly tell him where to go.

can't say this... can't say that because it might hurt someone's feeling's .......

 

geeeze .......   the world has really lost the plot   !!!  

double post...deleted

Edited July 1, 20206 yr by steven100

suck on that, zuckerberg

1 hour ago, CorpusChristie said:

What exactly is "hate speech" ?

Whatever the woke want it do be 

1 hour ago, CorpusChristie said:

What exactly is "hate speech" ?

I’m sure there’s a dictionary definition. 
Maybe even a legal one, depending on the jurisdiction. 
And I’m pretty sure the companies involved in this boycott also have their internal definition.  

11 hours ago, LeamchabangLarry said:

suck on that, zuckerberg

Mist be a juvenile.

13 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

What exactly is "hate speech" ?

Anything that you disagree with.

15 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

What exactly is "hate speech" ?

 

There is a short and specific definition on Google from the Cambridge dictionary.

 

Blatant hate speech, as per that definition is easily recognizable.

 

However, the problem arises when some claim anything they don't like or agree with to be hate speech.

A post has been removed:

 

10) Do not comment on moderation publicly in the open forum; this includes individual actions, and specific or general policies and issues. This also includes posting an emoticon in response to a public notice made by a moderator. 

I know the shareholders wouldn't be happy, but if I was Zuckerberg I would drop the entire platform for a month in response to their ad-blocking.

 

FB has made their billions providing the biggest free social media platform in the world. Fight back against these minority groups, let the normal users voice (on another platform) their opinions against them.

 

That should wake the woken................

Truly outstanding news. Give FB a very hard time, and put them in their place. They are totally tone deaf, and the world is speaking!

22 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

What exactly is "hate speech" ?

Anything that goes against far left thinking.

Love it. Less advertisers means it's cheaper for me to advertise, means bigger margins ????☺️

17 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Anything that goes against far left thinking.

Statements like this one, I find amusing. Remember when there used to be democrats and republicans? Now, most of the heavily indoctrinated members of the right, are using expressions like the far left, socialists, extremists, leftists, and other bizarre, and juvenile names when referring to a democratic voter. I do not call Republicans names. I do not need to, as my self esteem is high, and I am fine with who I am, what I believe in, and feel no need to demonize those of opposing views, which includes alot of good friends, and family. We all have to share the planet, right? I tend to call those on the opposite side of the aisle republicans, or the opposition. Civility is the essence of nobility, right? Just because others have hate in their hearts, does not mean we should feel compelled to reflect that vacuum of humanity, and embrace the heart of darkness. And when I do criticize the president, I typically make it a point NOT to criticize his followers. I get it. People feel differently about the issues. 

 

I am a democrat, and very, very proud of it. But, I am very centrist, as are the vast majority of Americans on the opposite side, of where you stand. 

Edited July 2, 20206 yr by spidermike007

6 minutes ago, reallyaffiliated said:

Love it. Less advertisers means it's cheaper for me to advertise, means bigger margins ????☺️

Only if you buy the same targeting I assume. 

I don’t get it! People in the US are allowed to sport huge swastika tattoos publicly, protected by the the first amendment, i.e. free speech, which is ridiculous in my opinion, but saying on Facebook what you want is not allowed?! In my opinion, it should be either everything goes or nothing in that regard, but what’s going on there is cherry picking! 

Edited July 2, 20206 yr by pacovl46
Typo

6 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

I don’t get it! People in the US are allowed to sport huge swastika tattoos publicly, protected by the the first amendment, i.e. free speech, which is ridiculous in my opinion, but saying on Facebook what you want is not allowed?!

 

They are allowed to say it on Facebook. There is no law saying they are not allowed. 

Quote

In my opinion, it should be either everything goes or nothing in that regard, but what’s going on there is cherry picking! 

Who’s picking what cherries? 

Edited July 2, 20206 yr by welovesundaysatspace

Since when did our more, ahem, ‘conservative’ members of TV become raving socialists? 
 

FB is a private platform. Your ‘free’ access to it is paid for by these advertisers. If they don’t want their advertising dollars providing a forum for knuckle headed howling at the sky, it it’s their prerogative. 
 

If you don’t like what they are doing, feel free to start up your own global social media platform - the good free market capitalists you claim to be...

Edited July 2, 20206 yr by samran

On 7/1/2020 at 6:41 PM, CorpusChristie said:

What exactly is "hate speech" ?

I was kicked off for hate speech, someone posted a pic of a dog hanging by its head in a rope and a chinese lady with a big smile on her face cutting its throat, I commented that what can you expect from  scum and  animals, got tossed for 24 hours for hate speech

 

7 minutes ago, seajae said:

I was kicked off for hate speech, someone posted a pic of a dog hanging by its head in a rope and a chinese lady with a big smile on her face cutting its throat, I commented that what can you expect from  scum and  animals, got tossed for 24 hours for hate speech

 

I would have banned you for longer. 

Edited July 2, 20206 yr by welovesundaysatspace

On 7/1/2020 at 7:41 AM, CorpusChristie said:

What exactly is "hate speech" ?

A catch-all term to describe any speech which might dissent from your own social/political beliefs. Kind of like the 21st century definition of "racist"

4 hours ago, reallyaffiliated said:

Love it. Less advertisers means it's cheaper for me to advertise, means bigger margins ????☺️

Google will love it, too.

1 hour ago, pacovl46 said:

I don’t get it! People in the US are allowed to sport huge swastika tattoos publicly, protected by the the first amendment, i.e. free speech, which is ridiculous in my opinion, but saying on Facebook what you want is not allowed?! In my opinion, it should be either everything goes or nothing in that regard, but what’s going on there is cherry picking! 

It's simply leftist thinking. Leftists can't do ANYTHING without stacking the deck. From the media to moderating web sites (I'm not talking about TVF of course) to Facebook to counting votes, leftists simply cannot further their agenda without screwing people to the right of them in one way or another.

4 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Statements like this one, I find amusing. Remember when there used to be democrats and republicans? Now, most of the heavily indoctrinated members of the right, are using expressions like the far left, socialists, extremists, leftists, and other bizarre, and juvenile names when referring to a democratic voter. I do not call Republicans names. I do not need to, as my self esteem is high, and I am fine with who I am, what I believe in, and feel no need to demonize those of opposing views, which includes alot of good friends, and family. We all have to share the planet, right? I tend to call those on the opposite side of the aisle republicans, or the opposition. Civility is the essence of nobility, right? Just because others have hate in their hearts, does not mean we should feel compelled to reflect that vacuum of humanity, and embrace the heart of darkness. And when I do criticize the president, I typically make it a point NOT to criticize his followers. I get it. People feel differently about the issues. 

 

I am a democrat, and very, very proud of it. But, I am very centrist, as are the vast majority of Americans on the opposite side, of where you stand. 

Wow, that's a lot of thought about American politics for someone who claims to have America in the rear view mirror. Downright BIZARRO.

But despite the humor in that, let's set it aside. You should probably read and/or listen to the leftist media and how they and the usual suspects describe people and groups on the right. Actually, I'm sure you have. You just make a conscious decision to complain about leftists being properly labeled.

2 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

Wow, that's a lot of thought about American politics for someone who claims to have America in the rear view mirror. Downright BIZARRO.

But despite the humor in that, let's set it aside. You should probably read and/or listen to the leftist media and how they and the usual suspects describe people and groups on the right. Actually, I'm sure you have. You just make a conscious decision to complain about leftists being properly labeled.

Crazy Alex. You do understand that with this post you have just prooven SpiderMike to be totally correct. 

 

I guess I should give you some credit that you had to wait until your fourth sentence until you went into your usual leftist this leftist that rant.

 

I honestly do not think that you could have done a better job to proove SpiderMike right.

 

Bravo Crazy Alex, Bravo

3 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

It's simply leftist thinking. Leftists can't do ANYTHING without stacking the deck. From the media to moderating web sites (I'm not talking about TVF of course) to Facebook to counting votes, leftists simply cannot further their agenda without screwing people to the right of them in one way or another.

And if we wanted anymore proof just read this by Crazy Alex.

 

This time he was so anxious to get into his rant about leftists he mention it in his 3rd word.  It really is sad but what else do you expect?

The epidemic of demonitizing and shadow banning right-of-center channels on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, apparently isn't enough. This is the end-game of the far Left--they actually want to legislate and criminalize certain forms of speech. Now, that's only disturbing to Americans, because we haven't committed that folly yet. The UK has. Go ahead and try to do this in YankeeLand. I suspect you'll get rather more resistance at the wrong end of a muzzle.