Categorize the comment on the basis of sexual explicitness. If the comment is sexually explicit output Yes, otherwise output No.

When the Wehrmacht had belt buckles which claimed that "Gott Mit Uns"; the Japanese had the code Bushido which authorized and encouraged the beheading of any opponent who surrendered as being a "dishonorable" person (and did so from the battle of Midway on), and committed The Rape of Nanking, the Korean "comfort women's" enslavement; and the US and Great Britain and its allies chose to allow the continued extermination of the Jews and all those other undesirables in the Nazi death camps for strategic reasons; when Russia, once they were any ally, was encouraged by the other allies to commit their atrocities wherever they conquered, 'moral superiority' is virtually an invisible commodity by any National participant.

The victors wrote the histories. That is your 'moral superiority' in World War II.
Yes

"What Zuckerberg has done is to substitute the largely uninformed opinions of one-third of the population as to what constitutes news for the judgments of thousands of trained journalists, most of whom have made collecting and reporting the news their careers."

These would be the 'judgments' of the 'trained journalists' who predicted Trump's winning the Republican nomination for President, right? How about predicting that Bernie Sanders would be anything more than a minor footnote in the contest against She Who Will soon be Anointed Queen of the Democrats? The 'trained journalists' score on that one?

Seems to me that the 'largely uninformed opinions' (I think of them as votes) left those 'trained journalists' with egg on their faces.
Yes

Where do you see this info? It was not stated in the article.
No