Netizen Gang Badoy Capati took to Facebook to show that her Facebook post showing photos of the proposal drafts of the compromise agreement between the government and the Marcos family was taken down by the social networking site and was later restored with an apology for its “accidental” removal.
[ads2]
On January 2, Capati said Facebook removed her post for “not meeting community standards.”
“The COMPROMISE AGREEMENT proposal drafts by Atty Lozano with the Marcos Family (that I posted yesterday) was taken down by Facebook,” she wrote.
“It was reported as “not meeting community standards.” That means many accounts, or one high-up account or office reported it and asked Facebook to take it down,” she added.
She then asked the potential questions as to why her post could have been taken down, all the answers to which were “no.” She said the papers did not promote pornography, did not incite violence toward anyone or any group, not fake, and did not insult or emotionally aggrieve anyone.
Capati added, “Talagang Marcos pa rin.”
One of those who was tagged by Capati in her post, veteran journalist Ed Lingao, reacted to the removal of the post.
Lingao wondered why Facebook would remove Capati’s post when they allowed another netizen, someone called Flippinflips, post “vitriol, hate, lies, and nonsense.”
[ads1]
“FB removed Gang Badoy Capati’s photos of the proposed compromise agreement between the Marcos family and the government that was drafted by Oliver Lozano. The reason? The post “doesn’t follow Community Standards!” For posting photos of a document? Really, Facebook?” Lingao wrote.
“Yet people like “Doctor” Butchukoy (AKA Flippinflips) who spout vitriol, hate, lies, and nonsense in perpetual all-caps mode can reign over social media with impunity?” he added.
He also noted how Facebook also did the same thing to him last year.
“Obviously, your system hasn’t changed since you took down my post on the Marcoses last year and suspended my account. Well, happy new year to you,” Lingao said.
Lingao offered a possible suggestion as to the reason behind the post’s removal.
“Although baka may point nga si Allan Du Yaphockun. The proposed agreement is an insult to all of us and violates ANY thinking person’s community standards,” he added.
A few hours later, at 1:41 pm on January 2, Capati said her post was restored.
She pointed out, though, that the proposal drafted by Atty. Oliver Lozano was already received by several government offices and other entities around six months ago.
She also emphasized that for fairness’ sake, Presidential Legal Counsel Salvador Panelo said the proposal was just a draft and both parties have not made a deal, something that was also reported by the media.
Former Senator Bongbong Marcos said he did not know anything about the proposal, Capati said, as per an ABS-CBN report.
“And former Sen Bongbong Marcos denies any knowledge of this exchange between Palace lawyer Sal Panelo and Atty Lozano – and further says Lozano does not represent the Marcos family,” she wrote.
Capati celebrated the restoration of her post, tagging it a win for democracy.
“Other than that- Facebook restored the content of my first post which was “accidentally removed,” and apologized for the mistake,” she said. “Viva demokrasya.”
In her screenshots, Capati showed Facebook’s apology to her.
“A member of our team accidentally removed something you posted on Facebook. This was a mistake, and we sincerely apologize for this error. We’ve since restored the content, and you should now be able to see it,” Facebook said.
Capati posted a link to her Tumblr page, where she uploaded the drafts.
Malacañang said that that any compromise agreement between the government and Marcoses would need the Congress’ approval.
“The President has spoken. He said if there are (Marcos) properties that can be used to support the country, a law is needed. It is clear to the President that the decision does not rest on him alone. It is also a decision to be made by Congress because we have a law that punishes those who are guilty of plunder,” Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque said in his dzBB interview on January 2.
“Such law will be facing a lot of challenges and a law solely about the Marcoses cannot be passed. It will violate what we call the equal protection law. But the President has said any agreement between the government and the Marcoses would require a law,” he added.
[ads3]
