top of page

Zuckerberg's Threads: A Tale of Kindness and Censorship.

Jesse Saunders

19 July 2023

Threads promises to be a place of safe colaboration and freedom of expression, we explore this.

The Following Article is an Opinion Piece written by The Author. This article respresents their views and not necesserily those of The Anonymous Publishing House. Free speech as well as freedom of expression and opinion are a fundimental and natural right for all. Censorship will only ever silence the truth and in the persuit of free speech there may be times where you read words objectionable to you and your beliefs. Either contest and debate the opinions expressed, or skip to the next article/video.

We might not agree with the words written below, but we will fight til our last breath for the authors rights to say them.


Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is on a mission to promote his new text-based app, Threads, as a friendly and kind alternative to Twitter. However, amidst the media hype calling it a "Twitter killer," there's a crucial aspect that often goes unmentioned: the underlying nature of Threads' so-called friendliness. It seems Zuckerberg is promising a sanitized and censored platform, reminiscent of Facebook's previous pro-censorship campaign. Let's dive into the topic of achieving "kindness" through corporate censorship, with a touch of humor along the way.

Section 1: The Battle Begins Zuckerberg and a bunch of enthusiastic pundits have been celebrating the arrival of Threads, the app that's supposedly set to take down Elon Musk's Twitter empire. It's not just a clash between two billionaires; many are eagerly watching to see if Zuckerberg can stifle free speech better than he can defeat Musk. Who knew restraining free speech would become the new spectator sport?

Section 2: The Meta Censorship Promise Critics were up in arms when Musk dismantled Twitter's extensive censorship system. Zuckerberg, seizing the opportunity, now promises a "sane" alternative where Meta's vigilant censors will keep users in check. On the first day of Threads' rollout, millions signed up, thanks in part to Zuckerberg linking it to Instagram. The censors wasted no time either. When people attempted to follow Donald Trump Jr., they were greeted with a warning: "Are you sure you want to follow donaldjtrumpjr? This account has repeatedly posted false information." Oops! It seems like the censors were a bit too excited to get to work.

Section 3: Censorship Red Flags The incident with Donald Trump Jr.'s account raised some eyebrows. It was a clear indication that the company had implemented a pre-established warning system to flag accounts it disapproved of. Fortunately, after public outcry, the company quickly backtracked, dubbing it an "error." But come on, we all know it was a classic case of "caught in the act." The controversy served as a reminder that Meta's censorship system is alive and kicking, ready to shape and control viewpoints.

Section 4: Facebook's Track Record Facebook has long faced accusations of bias and targeting conservative and dissenting voices. Zuckerberg's pitch for "sane" management seemed like a desperate plea to appease left-leaning individuals unhappy with Twitter's relatively freer speech policies under Musk. Sure, Twitter has had its fair share of controversies involving bans and post removals, but it pales in comparison to the censorship fest that has long characterized Facebook. Most of Musk's critics attack him for reducing "content moderation" on Twitter. Who knew letting people speak their minds could be so controversial?

Section 5: The Promise of Threads Threads enters the scene just as a court ruling deems the government's interventions to censor people on social media as the "most massive attack against free speech in United States history." Now, Facebook offers an alternative to Twitter, assuring users that they will be protected from any ideas deemed problematic by Meta's staff. While free speech on Twitter is portrayed as harmful, Facebook promises to prioritize kindness. But wait, haven't we heard that before? Ah, yes, the echoes of Twitter's undefined "safety" standards to silence opposing views.

Section 6: The Push for Censorship Facebook has long attempted to position itself as the speech overlord, even launching an Orwellian commercial campaign to persuade the public to embrace censorship. They depicted young people heralding the merging of the real world and the internet, conveniently requiring the need for "content moderation." Sounds a bit creepy, doesn't it? Facebook is not alone in this censorship crusade. Figures from various sectors have assured the public that corporate and government censors will protect them from harmful thoughts. Because who needs freedom of speech when you have Big Brother watching over you?

Section 7: The Call for Transparency If Zuckerberg truly stands by his "sane" approach to social media, there's a straightforward way for him to demonstrate it: release the Facebook Files. Musk set a precedent by revealing the Twitter Files, which exposed a network of government interventions supporting censorship and blacklisting. The public deserves transparency, especially considering Facebook's size and influence. If Zuckerberg wants to boast about his "content moderation" methods, he should have no qualms about disclosing the details of past coordination with federal and congressional offices. Come on, Zuck, show us what you've got!


While Mark Zuckerberg continues to tout "kindness" and "sanity" as the selling points of his platforms, there's a lingering question about what these buzzwords truly mean. The world eagerly awaits the unveiling of the Facebook Files, hoping to shed light on the extent of censorship. As consumers, it's essential for us to understand what we're signing up for and at what cost. After all, Zuckerberg has enticed us with the promise of a censored platform, so let's see what lies behind the curtain of "content moderation."

For media inquiries, please contact:

UK - 020 3404 2295

USA - 0650 278 4440

AUS - 02 9072 9499

bottom of page