literally censored - By order of The Ministry, ZeroHedge.com shall be banned; Zuckerberg, Chief Truth Enforcer - [PEACE] [MINISTRY]

[zen at freedbms.net (Zenaan Harkness)]

Well, well, well. Well well, well well wellâ?¼

Who'da thunked to "shut it down"? :D

ALL Zerowedgie links literally censor blocked off Facebook.

  â??But muh muffuluggerin private statute protected state enforced
   private megoligopoly corporation, muffaluggerah!â??




Facebook Bans Zero Hedge
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-11/facebook-bans-zero-hedge

  Over the weekend, we were surprised to learn that some readers were
  prevented by Facebook when attempting to share Zero Hedge articles.
  Subsequently it emerged that virtually every attempt to share or
  merely mention an article, including in private messages, would be
  actively blocked by the world's largest social network, with the
  explanation that "the link you tried to visit goes against our
  community standards."

  â?¦ We were surprised by this action as neither prior to this
  seemingly arbitrary act of censorship, nor since, were we contacted
  by Facebook with an explanation of what "community standard" had
  been violated or what particular filter or article had triggered
  the blanket rejection of all Zero Hedge content.

  To be sure, as a for-profit enterprise with its own unique set of
  corporate "ethics", Facebook has every right to impose whatever
  filters it desires on the media shared on its platform.
  [MUFFALUGGERAH! Did I mention "muffaluggerah?" Cause DAMN!]
  It is entirely possible that one or more posts was flagged by
  Facebook's "triggered" readers who merely alerted a censorship algo
  which blocked all content.

  Alternatively, it is just as possible that Facebook simply decided
  to no longer allow its users to share our content in retaliation
  for our extensive coverage of what some have dubbed the platform's
  "many problems", including chronic privacy violations,
  https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-05/internal-facebook-leak-reveals-global-bribery-scheme-soften-data-privacy-laws
  mass abandonment by younger users
  https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-10/over-17-million-younger-facebook-users-have-quit-over-privacy-concerns
  , its gross and ongoing misrepresentation of fake users
  https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-01-24/facebook-slides-after-report-claims-50-its-users-are-fake
  , ironically - in retrospect - its systematic censorship 
  https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-01-17/facebook-now-censoring-talk-about-politics-and-religion-work
  and back door government cooperation
  https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-08/government-facebook-pipeline-reveals-corrupt-mix-social-media-state
  (those are just links from the past few weeks).

  Unfortunately, as noted above, we still don't know what exact event
  precipitated this censorship, and any attempts to get feedback from
  the company with the $500 billion market cap, have so far remained
  unanswered.

  We would welcome this opportunity to engage Facebook in a
  constructive dialog over the company's decision to impose a blanket
  ban on Zero Hedge content. Alternatively, we will probably not lose
  much sleep if that fails to occur: unlike other websites, we are
  lucky in that only a tiny fraction of our inbound traffic
  originates at Facebook, with most of our readers arriving here
  directly without the aid of search engines (Google banned us from
  its News platform, for reasons still unknown, shortly after the
  Trump victory) or referrals.
  https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-25/google-permanently-bans-200-fake-news-sites
  https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-21/one-statistics-professor-was-just-banned-google-here-his-story
  https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-21/google-explored-ways-bias-immigration-ban-search-results
  https://zerohedge.whotrades.com/blog/43109872936

  That said, with Facebook increasingly under political, regulatory
  and market scrutiny for its arbitrary internal decisions on what
  content to promote and what to snuff, its ever declining user
  engagement, and its soaring content surveillance costs, such
  censorship is hardly evidence of the platform's "openness" to
  discourse, its advocacy of free speech, or its willingness to
  listen to and encourage non-mainstream opinions, even if such
  "discourse" takes place in some fake user "click farm" somewhere in
  Calcutta.