• Latest
  • Trending
  • All
  • News
  • Business
  • Lifestyle
Facebook Admits Threat to Ban Knitting 81-Year-Old for 'Hate Speech' Was a Mistake

Facebook Admits Threat to Ban Knitting 81-Year-Old for 'Hate Speech' Was a Mistake

March 7, 2021
Biden Admin Paroled Thousands Of Migrants Into US Without Any Plan To Return Them Home

Biden Admin Paroled Thousands Of Migrants Into US Without Any Plan To Return Them Home

July 8, 2025
Rubio Announces Release of American Former Ballerina From Russian Prison

Report: Imposter Poses as Rubio Using AI

July 8, 2025
Trump To Send Portion Of Key Missile Shipment To Ukraine

Trump To Send Portion Of Key Missile Shipment To Ukraine

July 8, 2025
Feds Throw Book At Armed Leftists Arrested In Texas ICE ‘Ambush’ Attack

Feds Throw Book At Armed Leftists Arrested In Texas ICE ‘Ambush’ Attack

July 8, 2025
Elite College Says It Will No Longer Appease Pro-Hamas Protesters

Elite College Says It Will No Longer Appease Pro-Hamas Protesters

July 8, 2025
Tucker Carlson Accuses Pam Bondi’s DOJ Of Epstein Cover-Up — Gives Two Theories

Tucker Carlson Accuses Pam Bondi’s DOJ Of Epstein Cover-Up — Gives Two Theories

July 8, 2025
Conservative Churches Win Massive Concession In Court Case Against IRS

Conservative Churches Win Massive Concession In Court Case Against IRS

July 8, 2025
Reverend Disavows Girlfriend Who Ranted About Whiteness In Wake Of Texas Floods

Reverend Disavows Girlfriend Who Ranted About Whiteness In Wake Of Texas Floods

July 8, 2025
Failed Candidate Takes Another Shot At GOP-Held Senate Seat

Failed Candidate Takes Another Shot At GOP-Held Senate Seat

July 8, 2025
Top 25 Wikipedia Searches for 2024 — #1 Has More Than 44 Million Page Views

Memos Reveal Advice Given to Harris During Campaign, but Not Taken: Book

July 8, 2025
EXCLUSIVE: Inside The Biden EPA’s Double Down On DEI Ahead Of Trump’s Return

EXCLUSIVE: Inside The Biden EPA’s Double Down On DEI Ahead Of Trump’s Return

July 8, 2025
EXCLUSIVE: USAID Quietly Sent Thousands Of Viruses To Chinese Military-Linked Biolab 

EXCLUSIVE: USAID Quietly Sent Thousands Of Viruses To Chinese Military-Linked Biolab 

July 8, 2025
  • Donald Trump
  • State of the Union
  • Elon Musk
  • Tariffs
  • Congress
  • Faith
  • Immigration
Tuesday, July 8, 2025
  • Login
IJR
  • Politics
  • US News
  • Commentary
  • World News
  • Faith
  • Latest Polls
No Result
View All Result
IJR
No Result
View All Result
Home Wire

Facebook Admits Threat to Ban Knitting 81-Year-Old for 'Hate Speech' Was a Mistake

by Western Journal
March 7, 2021 at 6:50 pm
in Wire
240 12
2
Facebook Admits Threat to Ban Knitting 81-Year-Old for 'Hate Speech' Was a Mistake
491
SHARES
1.4k
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Imagine Rita Rich-Mulcahy’s surprise when Facebook flagged her for an offense she knew she didn’t commit.

This widowed 81-year-old knits to pass the time. And she says it nearly got her banned for “hate speech.”

“Facebook obviously use a bot to trawl around Facebook and I had made two comments, totally innocent, which the bot saw as hate speech,” Rich-Mulcahy, who lives in Adelaide, Australia, told the Shropshire Star last month. “It may seem a small thing to most people, but to someone who had never even had an overdue library book, being charged with using hate speech was frightening.”

Rich-Mulcahy, who describes herself as a “porcophile,” joined a knitting group on Facebook to help cope with the loss of her husband and decided to set a target of knitting 100 pigs.

The trouble started after she described her knitted stuffed piglets as “white pigs” in a Facebook comment.

The comment warranted one of two warnings she feared would eventually lead to her account’s removal.

“The second time was when I posted a picture and I said ‘hi-viz piggy,'” Rich-Mulcahy said.

“Now I have two strikes against me with no way to appeal. So the bot will watch everything I type now. It is ludicrous. If I ditch Facebook I would lose my great connection with my Shropshire friends.”

One more strike would lead to a permanent ban, Rich-Mulcahy said Facebook told her.

Her only crime was knitting fuzzy animals, yet she feared that any action she took on the social media giant would eventually alienate her from her community of knitting friends.

Rich-Mulcahy’s story is only one of many instances of Big Tech censorship, however.

Many users lament their negative experiences, from similar false “hate speech” accusations to obsessive “fact-checking” mechanisms on articles shared with friends.

Social media’s censorship efforts have reached new heights, however, as bots and algorithms plunder innocent accounts and punish users for specific trigger words even when those words are used in harmless contexts.

Using artificial intelligence to police language poses a big problem. Computers lack the discernment humans have to determine a user’s intent. In this case, human review proved to be the solution to a bot’s mistake.

If a term as simple as “white pigs” could warrant this response, what other harmless language could lead to baseless bans?

Better yet, who or what should possess the authority to determine what constitutes or goes beyond acceptable speech?

In Rich-Mulcahy’s case, the censorship proved erroneous. Facebook admitted and apologized for its mistake and restored her posts.

“Our systems made a mistake here and the comments have now been reinstated. We do sometimes make mistakes when reviewing content, which is why we give people the opportunity to appeal against our decisions,” Facebook told the Star.

Facebook admits ‘mistake’ in threat to ban 81-year-old knitter for hate speech https://t.co/PAzNyUZCpf pic.twitter.com/xFSDSUYRqC

— New York Post (@nypost) February 25, 2021

Other social media users may not share the same experiences with censorship efforts, however.

Of course, platforms will observe and report suspicious activity occurring on their sites. This much offers a virtual equivalent to the classic “falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater” analogy, allowing free speech with limitations that necessitate accountability.

But what can users do when “fact-checkers” and social media administrators inject their own biases into judgments or use bots to track and censor users’ language? Will their appeals yield the same result as Rich-Mulcahy’s?

It seems society explores that question today, in a political and social climate so polarized and reproachful of opposition.

Unless something changes, we may not like the answer we receive.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Share196Tweet123
Western Journal

Western Journal

Advertisements

Top Stories June 10th
Top Stories June 7th
Top Stories June 6th
Top Stories June 3rd
Top Stories May 30th
Top Stories May 29th
Top Stories May 24th
Top Stories May 23rd
Top Stories May 21st
Top Stories May 17th

Join Over 6M Subscribers

We’re organizing an online community to elevate trusted voices on all sides so that you can be fully informed.





IJR

    Copyright © 2024 IJR

Trusted Voices On All Sides

  • About Us
  • GDPR Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Editorial Standards & Corrections Policy
  • Subscribe to IJR

Follow Us

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • Politics
  • US News
  • Commentary
  • World News
  • Faith
  • Latest Polls

    Copyright © 2024 IJR

Top Stories June 10th Top Stories June 7th Top Stories June 6th Top Stories June 3rd Top Stories May 30th Top Stories May 29th Top Stories May 24th Top Stories May 23rd Top Stories May 21st Top Stories May 17th