The story directly reports on an action by FB and provides context for other choices that it does—and does NOT—take. There's necessarily some editorial judgement and risk of bias in making those decisions about context, and the piece could be better about identifying how it chose what to cite. I take it that the “real” story is how FB makes choices like this, and that this issue is obviously controversial. The report doesn't help much with understanding how FB is, or is not, taking responsibility for communications between an elected leader and his public.

I think this article brings some context about the misinformation that the Brazilian president is trying to spread through social media and adds some possibilities that are around the Facebook treatment for this specific case. As the author mention, it's hard to tell if Facebook will do the same to other kinds of lies in political speeches.

This was good right up until the last paragraph speculating that this will somehow impact Trump in some manner. Quite a shame that people cannot just report news...

A pretty good recap of how Facebook has been dealing with life-threatening misinformation from political figures, in this case, Brazil's President Bolsonaro. I appreciate that author Josh Constine linked the original misinformation rather than forcing us to take him and Facebook at their word.