Mark Zuckerberg Doesn’t Want to Ban Holocaust Deniers or Sandy Hook Truthers

The Facebook CEO has advocated for “multiple” chances to get it right.

Mark Zuckerberg testifies in front of Congress.Tom Williams/Congressional Quarterly/Newscom via ZUMA Press

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

In April, Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified in front of Congress that the company would eliminate hate speech on the platform within 5 to 10 years using AI technology the company is currently developing. But Zuckerberg says that he thinks both Holocaust Deniers and Sandy Hook truthers, two fringe conspiracy groups that even GOP leaders have condemned, would not be subject to the crackdown.

In a 90-minute interview with Recode‘s Kara Swisher, Zuckerberg discussed issues of censorship on the platform, including the company’s alleged conservative bias and its interference in Myanmar. When asked why he couldn’t take down content that calls Sandy Hook a fraud, Zuckerberg conceded that he believes the claim is false, but that only direct harassment against victims of the tragedy would be removed. In his justification, he likened the group to Holocaust deniers.

“I’m Jewish, and there’s a set of people who deny that the Holocaust happened,” Zuckerberg told Recode. “I find that deeply offensive. But at the end of the day, I don’t believe that our platform should take that down because I think there are things that different people get wrong. I don’t think that they’re intentionally getting it wrong.”

Elaborating on the statement, he said that it was difficult to “impugn intent and to understand the intent” and that “if you’re not trying to organize harm against someone, or attacking someone, then you can put up that content on your page.”

He did say that it’s possible Facebook would not push the content to users’ feeds, and that he did not feel Facebook had a “responsibility to make it widely distributed.”

The interview comes just a day after House Judiciary members met to discuss the alleged “conservative bias” of both Facebook and other platforms. At the hearing, Rep. Ted Deutch (D-Fla.) asked YouTube why it wouldn’t remove InfoWars and its host Alex Jones, who has been a driving force of conspiracies about both the Sandy Hook and Parkland shooting, from its platform despite repeated violations for harassment. 

“How many strikes does a conspiracy theorist who attacks grieving parents and survivors of a mass shooting get?” Deutch asked a Youtube executive, who responded that the company has a “strikes” policy for platform offenders. 

Facebook’s Head for Global Policy Management Monika Bickert told the committee that Facebook will take down pages like InfoWars“if they posted sufficient content that violated our threshold.” She was not, however, able to clarify what that threshold was.

An internal document obtained by Motherboard was able to shed some clarity on the company’s content guidelines. According to the report, a page or group will be taken down if it includes sexual solicitation in at least two “elements,” such as the title, photo, or pinned post. Other guidelines in the obtained document included instructions to remove a page or group “if at least 30 percent of the content posted by other people within 90 days violates Facebook’s community standards.” Regarding hate speech, internal guidelines instructed moderators to remove a user if there were 5 or more infractions of the community guidelines. 

The company’s CEO, however, seemed to espouse a more lenient approach.

“I just think, as abhorrent as some of those examples are, I think the reality is also that I get things wrong when I speak publicly,” said Zuckerberg. “I’m sure a lot of leaders and public figures we respect do too, and I just don’t think that it is the right thing to say, ‘We’re going to take someone off the platform if they get things wrong, even multiple times.'”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate