UPDATE: Why Facebook blocked Popular Information's reporting on Laura Loomer
UPDATE: Why Facebook blocked Popular Information's reporting on Laura Loomer
Yesterday, Popular Information published a detailed report on the close relationship between former President Donald Trump and Laura Loomer, a far-right conspiracy theorist who says America should be a "white Judeo-Christian ethnostate." Shortly after the piece was published, we heard from readers who said they were unable to post our story about Loomer on Facebook. So we tried it ourselves. Facebook blocked the post, saying that Popular Information's reporting violated Facebook's "Community Standards."
The message from Facebook claims Popular Information "tried to get likes, follows, shares, or video views in a misleading way." There was a button to request a review of the decision, but clicking the button generated an error.
We contacted a spokesperson for Meta (the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and Threads) to ask why our piece was being censored. According to a Meta spokesperson, Popular Information’s story was initially blocked for violating spam policies but was being restored.
Did Loomer evade her Facebook ban?
Loomer's page was removed from Facebook and Instagram in May 2019. At the time, Facebook said that Loomer — along with Alex Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos, and other extremists — was banned from the service for violating its "policies against dangerous individuals and organizations."
"We’ve always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology," the company said. “The process for evaluating potential violators is extensive and it is what led us to our decision to remove these accounts today.” Facebook cited Loomer's association with extremist figures. She and others banned from Facebook and Instagram were also "prohibited from creating new accounts." (At various times, Loomer has also been banned from Uber, Lyft, Paypal, Venmo, GoFundMe, and other services.)
In response, Loomer sued Facebook for $3 billion. A lawyer representing Loomer said the company made "malicious, false and defamatory statements" against Loomer. In a statement, the lawyer said that Facebook's decision "subjected her to hatred, distrust, ridicule, contempt and disgrace, and the threat of severe bodily injury or death by those who are now led to believe that she is dangerous and a domestic terrorist against Muslims in particular. Muslims and other extremists thus are now prone to retaliate against her and her life is in mortal danger." That case, along with several other lawsuits Loomer filed against Facebook, was dismissed.
But, since May 2024, Loomer — or someone impersonating her — has operated a new page on Facebook. On Wednesday, the page featured an attack on Popular Information's reporting.
An account purporting to be from Loomer was also active on Instagram.
Popular Information contacted Meta about Loomer's apparent return to Facebook and Instagram. A few hours later, the Facebook and Instagram pages were removed. A Meta spokesperson said that Loomer — and pages and groups that represent Loomer — are still banned. (Discussion of Loomer and her ideology by other people are allowed.)
Facebook suppresses political content
Under Elon Musk's leadership, X is relentlessly promoting Trump's campaign, including a two-hour conversation between Musk and Trump on Monday night. Meta has taken a different approach.
Across Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, Meta has made a decision to suppress content that involves political issues in favor of "sports, music, fashion, beauty, [and] entertainment." That means Popular Information's reporting, along with most other political media outlets, is deprioritized and not widely distributed.
Adam Mosseri, the Meta executive who runs Instagram and Threads, explained that politics did not produce enough "incremental engagement or revenue" to be worth the trouble. In other words, "Let them eat cake."
In February, Meta announced it would change the settings for all users on Instagram and Threads to opt-out of seeing political posts from anyone a user does not follow. (The company said a similar change was coming to Facebook soon.) Meta also has a broad and vague definition of "politics," a category it says includes any discussion of "social issues."
Popular content being displayed to non-followers is the main way for users to grow an account. It remains a viable source of growth for everyone except those who post about politics.
A study by Accountable Tech released earlier this week found that "progressive Instagram accounts saw their reach decline by 65%" since the policy change. The study looked at accounts for Hillary Clinton, GLAAD, Human Rights Campaign, and others. (The group also sought the participation of conservative accounts, but none agreed.) Accountable Tech said that its study shows that Meta has "systematically remove[d] trustworthy 'political' content from their recommendation surfaces."
Laura Loomer is discussed in this inspiring piece by Charlotte Clymer as she tells us about Evangelicals for Harris.
https://charlotteclymer.substack.com/p/wait-evangelicals-for-harris
I think everyone should deal with her like the Evangelicals do, because I am sure it frustrates her no end.
As I have reduced my exposure to MSM I feel more optimistic that Harris-Walz can win against Big Billionaire Bro Bucks. I am glad I no longer subscribe to MSM like NYT and WaPo, and Substack is the only social media I subscribe to. Instead I am trying to be politically active and that is good for my soul too, instead of just waiting for doom or winning in November.
Wow, that was quick! If Facebook seriously means,"We’ve always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology," Trump and his minions (Bannon, Steve Miller, and now JD Vance) would be banned. The parent company Meta is using its power to remove the exposure to truth and the correcting of political news distortions, by taking this convoluted path. Accountable Tech said that its study shows that Meta has "systematically remove[d] trustworthy 'political' content from their recommendation surfaces." It appears that their thinking is muddled in a way that is creating more muddle!