THE TZN FRESH NEWS! PAGE
ARTICLES IN PREPARATION, UPDATES AND FRESH NEWS TOO RAW
FOR TZN NEWS PAGES
This page is for the latest, but not quite ready for prime time, news. Keep fresh, stay informed...
(To comment on Fresh News!&Raw articles, please use the Feedback form below.)
October 27, 2014
FACEBOOK VIOLATES USER'S RIGHTS
Facebook locks Red Slider and The Sacramento Z Newspaper out of their FB pages!
Facebook has capriciously decided "Red Slider" is an "invalid name" and has blocked all access to our accounts. FB demands we change our name or submit to their intrusion into our privacy...
Last Friday (october 24, 2014) your editor clicked to his facebook page, as he does almost every
morning. But this time, instead of being taken directly to his FB page "Red Slider", he was
presented with a "login" message. Strange, he's usually taken directly to his page. He then
entered in his name and password and attempted to login to his FB account. The message kept
returning with "invalid user name or password." After checking, double-checking and re-entering
his login info several times, a new message appeared, "Red Slider is an invalid name"
The message now had a new instruction that insisted I change my name to a different "valid" name in order to access my pages.
There was also another, FB provided link, to a page titled, "What Names Are Allowed On Facebook " The Z
invites you to go there and look for yourself. There isn't a single rule or instruction on that
page that is violated by Red Slider's use of his name "Red Slider" on Facebook. Not one. To know
that, you need to know a little more about the name "Red Slider" and its credentials:
More important and to the point is that Red Slider's entire history on Facebook is under the name Red Slider, and has been for nearly 10 years. Facebook has total access or can easily find that history. It is an unbroken history of good faith and membership in Facebook. His posts are thoughtful, contributive and generous offerings of himself to other facebook members. He has never broken facebook rules of etiquette, used abusive language, made ad hominem or personal attacks on anyone, or otherwise posted or participated outside the spirit and requirments of facebook membership. His name and the credentials and reputation that go with that name are well-established.
It is not an option to simply advise Red Slider to go to another social network to conduct his work and activity. He has spent a decade developing those credentials on Facebook. Far too long to simply go off and start over again.
It is arbitrary, capricious and damaging, personally and professionally, for Facebook Inc. to
simply and abruptly exclude Red Slider from participating in facebook under his established name.
If that were it, if it were just a matter of Red Slider and his reputation and credentials, or even the effective consequences of FB actions on The Sacramento Z, that would be serious enough. But Facebook chooses to compound it's intrusion into the personal privacy of its users and its discriminatory practices by the very process they pretend to provide targeted users to remedy the injustice. What Facebook provides is a very hard to find portal to appeal "invalid name" judgements. You'll find it on this page
The interesting thing about their so-called "appeal form" is that it requires the victim of the injustice to submit their date of birth and copies (jpg images) of personal identification (driver's licenses? birth certificates? social security cards?). If you don't accept such intrusions into your privacy, you simply cannot submit the information (even though there is another text box to fully describe the situation in words.)
This is similar to Facebook's initial notification of "invalid name" violation, where it compells the user to change their name in order to even get into their account to find out what is going on, and address the matter. A "forced confession" in effect, before you have even met your accuser or have been advised of any "charges" against you. Clear violations of one's privacy and civil liberties.
A Z subscriber's POV:
...there surely are a lot of people on facebook who are not using their birth names. Robert Galbraith has a page on facebook. John Le Carre has a facebook page. Toni Morrison has a facebook page. Bill Clinton has several facebook pages - and his name is a mess. Ram Dass has a facebook page -- what about all the people who have named themselves some kind of spiritual name? How about the mono-named? Bono. Madonna. Pele. How about Sting? He has a facebook page, and his name doesn't sound much like one his mother would have named him. Oh! Ringo Starr. There's "fake" name if you ever heard one.
How about Queen Latifah? How do they know that's her "real" name?
Sounds suspicious to me - like, what's she queen of? It's not about
facebook, but I just read in the paper (I think, but I read it
today, anyway) that Queen Elizabeth, whose legal name is comprised
of many, many, many names, signed up for Twitter in the past couple
of days and that her Twitter handle is "Elizabeth R," which is how
she signs everything - R, without a period, standing for "regina,"
latinate for "queen." She's on facebook as Queen Elizabeth, and I
doubt that that's her real name - probably a nickname, wouldn't you
Speaking of queens, how about BB King? How about Bo Diddly?
Diddly's got to be at least as bad as Slider, for those facebook
honchos whose minds happen to be in the gutter. There are persons on
facebook with the names Red Young, Red Moss, Red Foo, and Sexi Red.
Here's what I think bothers me the most: facebook just summarily
did this to you, leaving you no avenue to appeal or to explain
yourself - no avenue to do what you're trying to do, to say, look,
here are all these people who know me as Red Slider, here are my
writings, my Poetry Center dealings - and giving you no standards by
which your use of your name could be fairly and consistently
judged. Without standards, without a fair method of application of
standards, and without a fair process to appeal, it's arbitrary and
capricious. And I don't believe in carrying out dealings among
human beings arbitrarily and capriciously. Facebook is a public
accommodation; why shouldn't you be entitled to due process?
So, now, you see? I am suitably outraged!!!
— Z Subscriber
—The remarkable poet and dear friend, in whose memory this edition of The Z is dedicated
(see Tribute to Summer Breeze) also had her name "invalidated" and stripped from her by Facebook about two years ago.
After that happened, and Summer was forced to adopt another name, she was never the same person again. Her pages on FB, as well as her personal correspondence, were strikingly different from then until the time of her death.
—Many who are sympathetically responding to the matter of Red Slider's name, seem to assume, even so, that it is a pseudonym or pen name of some kind. If one reads closely however, that has never been agreed to in our commentary on the matter, and both Red Slider and the Z refuse to discuss it, one way or the other. It is, as the whole of our
coverage asserts, nobody's business but Red Slider's. And that's the way we intend to leave it. — editor.]
This is a serious, ongoing issue that the Z intends to fully cover in upcoming edition. We only provided this quick coverage in the "Fresh News" Section owing to its immediate impact on the Z and its editor.
Even before this situation developed, the Z had been planning to
add a "Digital Divide" section dealing with significant matters
of net-culture, its commercialization and self-interested
abridgments of civil liberties along with concerns about ethics
and responsibility among those who regard the net as their
We view matters such as these with grave concern for the future
of free discourse and person to person exchange on the internet.
We are most concerned that corporations and other financial
interests are being permitted to write the laws that will govern
the use and abuse of the net, and write them in their own
selfish, narrowly drawn interests.
Some we have spoken with simply throw up their hands (or
aggressively position themselves with the self-interested)
saying things like, "Well, it's their property, they can do
what they want," or "It's free (Facebook, e.g.) so you get
what you pay for." We vigorously challenge that position.
We should recall that the earliest legal battles over civil
rights law—battles that prepared the way for civil
rights law— were over the rights of privately owned
facilities and organizations which owned and operated what
was or needed to be regarded as "public spaces". Civil
rights and civil liberties law is made from the fabric of
telling social clubs, restaurants, golf-courses, and all
kinds of "privately-owned" public spaces that they were not
free to write the rules as they wished, nor exclude people
for capricious reasons.
The Z, too, believes these early strata of settled law apply
no less to the virtual public spaces of the internet and the
people who visit them. We assert that it is time for the
people who will suffer the ambitions of corporate
self-interest, if corporations continue to be the only
interests sitting at the tables that write internet law, to
pushback and get involved. We the people must sit
at those tables and demand real values and the public
interest have as much weight and say about the future of the
internet as market values and self-interested corporations
and their lawyers.
Stay tuned. You are going be reading much more about this
and related matters in the months to come in the pages of
The Sacramento Z Newspaper. This little bit of "Fresh
News" isn't even a preamble to what's ahead.
Red Slider, Editor and Publisher,
The Sacramento Z Newspaper
October 19, 2014
Nothing new here. Just another Breton cheerleading tune for Measure L.
Breton adds nothing to his previous column that we didn't already shred in our news pages this issue.
He spills a lot of ink trying to tar the no-on-L folks by alluding to Heather's Fargo's tactics in her
last campaign for mayor -- tying it (in his view) to some kind of "power grab" political tactic and
suggesting that disqualifies her and her "No on L" opinions on the ballot measure.
Of course it's totally irrelevant how Heather Fargo ran her last campaign. That had to do with a
candidate's personal campaign strategy, that's all (even if what he wrote is true). Measure L has
to do with restructuring the way city government operates. Comparing the two matters is not even
apples and oranges, Marcos.
With logic like that, I think we can all stop paying attention to Marcos Breton on this subject. It
would appear he's no longer even writing an opinion column. Just putting out copy for the Bee's KJ
marketing division -- native ad stuff pretending to be thought. ho-hum.
October 18, 2014
SN&R: 'KINGS ARENA GOES FARM TO FORK'
Is the Sacramento News & Review's Blog becoming a back-door to corporate native-ad creep?
True, the SN&R Blogs ('Page Burner' in this case) is a looser info-element
than the newspaper itself, taking all kinds of posts from all kinds of posters. Still, a recent one posted by Janelle Bitker on the 'Kings announcement of a "Farm to Fork" facility in its not-yet-built arena strikes us as getting
close to blurring the line between blog announcements and
For one thing, Janelle Bitker, the person who posted the item, is (we presume) an SN&R staffer—having an SN&R mailbox addy and more than a hundred articles to her credit.
The post itself is tied to a KJ photo-op announcement
made at a Kings "press" event (Mayor Johnson stands at the podium with
a King's logo on it) and we can pretty well see that a good
part of city officialdom has been turned into a Kings Inc./NBA Inc./Sports Inc.
marketing division (along with the front pages of The Sac
Bee - what, the 'Sports Section' isn't enough?).
The article itself is not about anything happening now,
except for the Kings announcing their future plans and some
of the cast they're lining up for it. No fine dining photos, no food to be actually tasted and reviewed. That is, it's not really
news, its not really something to drool over anytime soon.
Moreover, the post appears to be little more than thinly massaged
copy of something the Kings passed along to Ms Bitker, who
then passed it along to us.
Not much to say, except that it starts to have the smell of
"native ads"-- corporate product promotion disguised as
news or news "editorials". So there is very good reason to
raise a flag now and caution SN&R to pay careful
attention to what & where its copy is coming from &
why. Even if this is just a very early warning.
Corporate takeovers of our media (product pushers, not just
news conglomerates (bad enough) ) is no joke. They are very clever and
stealthy in their invasion of our more trustworthy sources
of information, and efforts to filter what we get from those
Richmond, California is learning the hard way as Standard Oil/Chevron moves in to occupy a news vacuum that once was the preserve of bona fide journalism (e.g. "Chevron PR website pretends to be an objective news source")
So, just a headsup, SN&R from your friends at the Z. Keep a sharp eye open, and err on the side of caution. We'd hate to see you lose sight of your own motto, "Your Independent Alternative News and Entertainment Resource", even just a little bit.
RE(SacBee headline): "Money mounts in strong-mayor bid"
Is that the reality, or is that the Bee
creating that reality?
The Bee might reply "Get over it, Z! Money is the reality in political
campaigns these days. The Bee didn't invent that!"
But is that really the case? Look at the headline they used. It just drips with making the
matter about money. But, they could just as well have used something like
WILL MONEY or VOTER SCRUTINY PREVAIL IN STRONG-MAYOR CAMPAIGN?
Now that puts a very different cast on what readers might be inclined to think about
as they read the Bee article, doesn't it? Is this something in which money will necessarily
dominate and decide matters, or something the voters should/must weigh, beyond all the streams
of money thrown and blitz ads?
A simple change of emphasis/attention and they might have been educating and encouraging
smart voting rather than capitulation to megaphones. But they didn't do that. They just
go right on creating a reality and pretending it is just news.
[also read related articles "BRETON" and 'NUANCE OR SEANCE? in this edition of the Z -- ed.]
October 14, 2014
This was the email reply we got to our notifying the Councilman of
The Z's front page article on him:
"Thank you for your message. I am currently out of the country and may not have access to email. Until my return on October 20th, please contact my office for assistance:
For schedule or sponsorship requests, email Alisa Johnson:firstname.lastname@example.org. If necessary you may reach her by phone at 808-7002.
For constituent concerns including zoning, businesses, and code enforcement, please contact Daniel Savala: email@example.com or 808-7169.
For information about the Boys & Girls Club project, Office Hours events, the Entertainment and Sports Complex including the Priority Worker Program, resolution and certificate requests, or requests for letters of support, please contact Delia Chacon: firstname.lastname@example.org or 808-1308.
For questions about the monthly newsletter, upcoming agenda items, and all other concerns, please email Andrea San Miguel: email@example.com. If necessary you may reach her by phone at 808-7233."
[That's it. An unsigned, automatic reply from a machine. - ed.]
Omoiyari, and our best to you,
Red Slider, editor
The Sacramento Z Newspaper
(**the name you provide is only for correspondence, or if we print
your comment in the Z. A pseudonym, pen-name or handle is fine with us.)