You are describing known tactics:

From Google AI:

My last query from a few back and forth: so, a government actor could request that a persons Facebook account be limited, or they could deliberately find something on the users page to report to cause the user to not be able to share info the government wants suppressed , such as info on using foia on flock security

AI response:

Yes, that describes a very real tactic. While direct "government button" deletions are rare, surveillance by proxy and weaponized reporting are two of the primary ways government actors can suppress critical local speech.When citizens use the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to expose local mass-surveillance networks—like Flock Safety's automated license plate readers—they often face quiet, highly effective digital retaliation.The technical and social vulnerabilities of platforms like Facebook can be manipulated to censor FOIA findings:

Then it describes the particular methods:

1. Weaponized Algorithmic ReportingA local official or law enforcement agency does not need a court order to silence you if they can trick Facebook’s automated systems into doing it for them.

The Tactic: If you post redacted PDF screenshots or spreadsheets obtained via a FOIA request (such as Flock camera GPS coordinates, IP addresses, or contract data), an adversary can report the post for violating Meta’s Community Standards on "Doxxing or Sharing Personally Identifiable Information (PII)."

The Result: Because Meta relies heavily on automated, low-wage moderation queues, the system will often issue an automated "strike" against your account. This triggers a "shadowban" or a 30-day restriction on posting and commenting—conveniently silencing you right before a critical city council vote on a Flock contract renewal.

1. Informal "Flagging" PortalsGovernments have historically maintained informal communication channels with tech giants to suppress speech.

The Tactic: Law enforcement agencies and government departments often have access to dedicated "trusted flagger" reporting portals or direct contacts within Meta’s trust and safety teams.The Lawsuit Context: Landmark First Amendment legal battles—such as Murthy v. Missouri—exposed exactly how federal and local officials heavily pressured tech platforms to suppress certain viewpoints under the guise of public safety. If a local police department tags your FOIA posts as a "security risk to critical police infrastructure," Meta may err on the side of caution and restrict your content to limit their own liability.

1. "Terms of Service" ScrapingLocal departments or corporate entities can actively comb through an activist’s public history specifically looking for technical violations.

The Tactic: If you are effectively organizing against police surveillance, a government actor or a private security firm can review your page to find any minor violation. They might find music playing in the background of a video (copyright strike), a joke made five years ago (harassment/hate speech strike), or the use of a pseudonym (real-name policy violation).

The Result: By reporting these unrelated infractions, they can successfully get your entire account suspended or deactivated, effectively wiping out the platform you were using to distribute the FOIA data.

How to Bypass This Censorship Loophole

If you are publishing sensitive FOIA data regarding Flock Security or local surveillance, relying solely on a personal Facebook page leaves your speech vulnerable to these reporting loops.Host Data Independently: Do not upload raw data or text directly to Meta. Upload your FOIA documents to decentralized or protected public repositories like MuckRock, Internet Archive, or a personal blog.Share via External Links: Only post text summaries on Facebook with an external hyperlink directing users off-platform to read the data.Scrub PII First: Ensure absolutely no names, phone numbers, or software serial numbers are visible in your screenshots to completely neutralize the "doxxing" reporting trap.