this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2026
965 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

88221 readers
3715 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago (4 children)

As shitty as Meta is, I really don't like the reductive nature of this headline. Here is the original Guardian article:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/sep/21/meta-ban-virginia-woolf-a-room-of-ones-own-barcelona-teatre-raval

"Meta bans ads for Virginia Woolf play in Spain because they relate to feminism"

This turned into "Meta Now Banning Ads That Promote Feminism", with a quote from the showrunner to make it sound even more scary. Frankly, either of them can barely be called journalism, because they can't be bothered to write more than a page on the subject.

[–] VAK@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago

They literally said that “any mention of civil rights, feminism or social reform are usually classified as ‘social topics’ by our automatic system,” and therefore rejected.

So how the fuck is it reductive?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 days ago

Look at that. Someone claiming that people are overreacting to this clear censorship of feminism.

What a surprise.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I don't think the headline is reductive at all, in fact, you could take it a step further and say Facefuck has banned all social activism in advertising.

[–] oakward@feddit.org 1 points 2 days ago

It seems like that in the Guardian's article, but there is more to it. Meta told them why and how to go around the censorship. Meta only fixed it after media attention. I trust that you are resourceful enough to translate what is below

The article of La Vanguardia

Sin embargo, Evelyn Arévalo, directora con Pep Tosar del teatro Raval, declara: “Desde la dirección del teatro, queremos matizar la respuesta que ha proporcionado Meta: El anuncio no se restauró rápidamente: Se colgó el día 16 de septiembre, el día 17 nos dimos cuenta de que se había rechazado, preguntamos al asistente de la página por los motivos de dicho rechazo y los reafirmó. Solicitamos revisión del anuncio y se informó de que darían respuesta a los dos días”.

A raíz de esta respuesta, el teatro Raval decidió autocensurarse y publicar el anuncio, un teaser, cambiando las oes de Woolf por asteriscos: W**lf, como se aprecia en la imagen, “y eliminando las referencias al feminismo de la publicación”.

Arévalo se muestra convencida de que “no fue hasta que los medios de comunicación informaron del caso, que restablecieron, por arte de magia, el anuncio”. La Vanguardia fue quien dio la noticia y otros medios también la publicaron, tanto en España como, por ejemplo, The Guardian en el Reino Unido.