It is a process that exemplifies how fragile the digital public sphere has become in 2025: Facebook has deleted a scientific paper created by me that critically examines the AfD. Title: "Analysis of the Incompetence, Scandals and Ideological Tendencies of the AfD: An Examination of the Years 2023 and 2024". This work was not just any text - it was the result of months of research and was used as part of an analysis for the LOSI Network of the United Nations, which evaluates global developments on human rights and democracy.
The post was published on Facebook on December 8, 2024, to make the results accessible to the public and to initiate a factual debate. Months later it was deleted without comment - with the absurd justification that it was "spam". Allegedly an appeal had even been filed and rejected. But I never submitted such an appeal. This means: Facebook deletes well-founded scientific analyses and then invents its own narrative to justify the action.
This deletion raises a crucial question: Do we want to continue supporting a medium that silences critical science on explosive political topics and thereby objectively plays into the hands of right-wing populist forces - only out of convenience or because there are "no alternatives"? While the platform publicly presents itself as a guarantor of freedom of speech, in practice it shows that any truth that is inconvenient disappears as "spam".
The consequence is fatal. People who commit themselves, research, invest their time, energy and often their own money in investigative work are ultimately left alone - with the exception of a few loyal supporters. The vast majority consume, click and stay, while algorithms reward those who incite, relativize and spread disinformation. The result is a digital landscape in which the truth is systematically thinned out until only a distorted reflection remains.
This deletion is not only an attack on a single work, it is a slap in the face of all those who stand for democracy and enlightenment based on facts. Anyone who continues to trust Facebook must be aware that they are supporting a system that marks scientific facts as "spam" and thereby weakens precisely those voices that could make the difference.
Investigative journalism requires courage, conviction – and your support.
English 
German 
Leider will FB keine kritischen Berichte, die nicht die Narrative der 🍊 bedienen.
Während eindeutig p*o*r*n*o*graphische Inhalte trotz Meldung verbleiben, weil sie nicht gegen die Gemeinschaftswerte verstossen, was auch bei eindeutig gewalttätigem Aufruf gilt, verschwinden sachlich korrekte Beiträge
Gruppen und Einzelpersonen werden abgemahnt oder gesperrt.
Mal ist der Gemüsesalat zu gefährlich, die Stricknadel ein Aufruf zur Gewalt, das Foto eines dreibeinigen Hundes verstörend.
Was mit der Zensur im Kleinen beginnt, endet in der großen Zensur des Journalismus.
Trifft das eigentlich auch die großen Medienhäuser?
Oder fällt denen gar nicht auf, wenn FB was loscht?
Die grossen Medienhäuser schreiben meistens mundgerecht und gehen nicht mehr dort an die orte, wo es wirklich brennt – ergo, passt alles mit dem FB