That guy defending his choice to post pictures of dead people, pretending the "corporate platform" (because well, it's always Us vs Evil Corporations isn't it -- don't forget those corporations are just collections of people like us) Facebook for taking it down, and not once taking responsibility for how his choice to post that may have been legitimately upsetting or offensive, or even morally wrong. Why does it work for his amateur opportunistic "scoop" take precedence over the deceased's privacy? Why does it work for him to claim posting a picture of someone violently killed by a truck is some kind of moral good, and yet taking it down is assaulting the very foundation of all that preserves the shrinking territory of what is good in our society.

This crusader has his moral compass all wrong.

As if he's angry his amateur "scoop" has been censored, like he's some kind of force of history and truth, when really he's just posting gore, declining to think of the people who height be harming by doing so. Because it's really all about him and his "rights", isn't it?

This guys confusion of his personal amoral choice with some fantasy of a moral crusade, and fake embedding of himself in some kind of narrative of evil corporations vs moral individuals, is just self-aggrandising hackery, that his gore lust doesn't merit. That his deluded ideas has any currency is one the things wrong with contemporary thought.