Mark Zuckerberg is putting a "dangerous precedent" by means of permitting a submit by means of Donald Trump to continue to be on Facebook, a team of civil rights leaders has warned.
Their assertion observed a video name with the social media giant's founder.
The US president's post, about the vast protests following the loss of life of George Floyd, used to be hidden by way of Twitter final week for "glorifying violence".
Facebook workforce also voiced their anger at their employer, with some staging a "virtual walkout".
In the post, the president wrote he would "send in the National Guard", and warned that "when the looting starts, the taking pictures starts".
Mr Trump shared the identical message on Twitter, the place it used to be hidden at the back of a warning label, prompting an escalating row between Twitter and the White House.
Mr Zuckerberg had in the past defended his selection to go away the identical submit up on Facebook, announcing he disagreed with Mr Trump's phrases however that human beings "should be capable to see this for themselves".
After assembly Mr Zuckerberg, three civil rights leaders spoke back that he was once wrong.
"We are disenchanted and started up via Mark's incomprehensible explanations for permitting the Trump posts to continue to be up," they stated in a joint statement.
"He did no longer show grasp of historical or current voter suppression and he refuses to renowned how Facebook is facilitating Trump's name for violence towards protesters.
"Mark is putting a very unsafe precedent for different voices who would say comparable detrimental matters on Facebook."
Mr Zuckerberg defended his judgement to Facebook body of workers in a digital question-and-answer session on Tuesday, in accordance to the New York Times.
It said the chief govt had stated he had made a "tough decision" however the social network's free speech standards intended that "the proper action" used to be to depart President Trump's publish up.
The newspaper added, however, that some personnel had claimed he used to be appearing out of concern of what Republicans would possibly do if Facebook acted otherwise.
Their assertion observed a video name with the social media giant's founder.
The US president's post, about the vast protests following the loss of life of George Floyd, used to be hidden by way of Twitter final week for "glorifying violence".
Facebook workforce also voiced their anger at their employer, with some staging a "virtual walkout".
In the post, the president wrote he would "send in the National Guard", and warned that "when the looting starts, the taking pictures starts".
Mr Trump shared the identical message on Twitter, the place it used to be hidden at the back of a warning label, prompting an escalating row between Twitter and the White House.
Mr Zuckerberg had in the past defended his selection to go away the identical submit up on Facebook, announcing he disagreed with Mr Trump's phrases however that human beings "should be capable to see this for themselves".
After assembly Mr Zuckerberg, three civil rights leaders spoke back that he was once wrong.
"We are disenchanted and started up via Mark's incomprehensible explanations for permitting the Trump posts to continue to be up," they stated in a joint statement.
"He did no longer show grasp of historical or current voter suppression and he refuses to renowned how Facebook is facilitating Trump's name for violence towards protesters.
"Mark is putting a very unsafe precedent for different voices who would say comparable detrimental matters on Facebook."
Mr Zuckerberg defended his judgement to Facebook body of workers in a digital question-and-answer session on Tuesday, in accordance to the New York Times.
It said the chief govt had stated he had made a "tough decision" however the social network's free speech standards intended that "the proper action" used to be to depart President Trump's publish up.
The newspaper added, however, that some personnel had claimed he used to be appearing out of concern of what Republicans would possibly do if Facebook acted otherwise.