Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the wp-plugin-hostgator domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114

Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the ol-scrapes domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php:6114) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/rest-api/class-wp-rest-server.php on line 1893

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php:6114) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/rest-api/class-wp-rest-server.php on line 1893

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php:6114) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/rest-api/class-wp-rest-server.php on line 1893

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php:6114) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/rest-api/class-wp-rest-server.php on line 1893

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php:6114) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/rest-api/class-wp-rest-server.php on line 1893

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php:6114) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/rest-api/class-wp-rest-server.php on line 1893

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php:6114) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/rest-api/class-wp-rest-server.php on line 1893

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php:6114) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/rest-api/class-wp-rest-server.php on line 1893
{"id":5586,"date":"2022-05-12T15:15:22","date_gmt":"2022-05-12T15:15:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/scienceandnerds.com\/2022\/05\/12\/how-facebook-undercut-the-oversight-board\/"},"modified":"2022-05-12T15:15:23","modified_gmt":"2022-05-12T15:15:23","slug":"how-facebook-undercut-the-oversight-board","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/scienceandnerds.com\/2022\/05\/12\/how-facebook-undercut-the-oversight-board\/","title":{"rendered":"How Facebook undercut the Oversight Board"},"content":{"rendered":"

Source: https:\/\/www.theverge.com\/23068243\/facebook-meta-oversight-board-putin-russia-ukraine-decision<\/a>
\n
<\/br><\/code><\/p>\n

\n

Today let\u2019s talk about the highest-profile conflict to date between Meta and its Oversight Board, an independent organization the company established to help it navigate the most difficult questions related to policy and content moderation<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Since before the board was created, it has faced criticism<\/a> that it primarily serves a public-relations function for the company formerly known as Facebook. The board relies on funding from Meta, it has a contractual relationship with it governing its use of user data, and its founding members were hand-picked by the company.<\/p>\n

Aiding in the perception that it\u2019s mostly a PR project is the fact that to date, Meta and the board have rarely been in conflict. In the first quarter of its existence, of 18 recommendations the board made to Meta, the company implemented 14<\/a>. And even though it often rules against Facebook\u2019s content moderators, ordering removed posts to be restored, none of those reversals has generate any significant controversy. (Also, from Facebook\u2019s perspective, the more the board reverses it, the more credible it is, and thus the more blame it can shoulder for any unpopular calls.)<\/p>\n

That\u2019s what made this week\u2019s statements, published by both sides, so noteworthy.<\/p>\n

After Russia\u2019s invasion of Ukraine in February, Meta had asked the board<\/a> to issue an advisory opinion on how it should moderate content during wartime. The conflict had raised a series of difficult questions, including under what circumstances users can post photos of dead bodies or videos of prisoners of war criticizing the conflict<\/a>.<\/p>\n

And in the most prominent content moderation question of the invasion to date, Meta decided to temporarily permit calls for violence against Russian soldiers, Vladimir Putin, and others<\/a>.<\/p>\n

All of which raised important questions about the balance between free expression and user safety. But after asking the board to weigh in, Meta changed its mind<\/a> \u2014 and asked board members to say nothing at all.<\/p>\n

From the company\u2019s blog post<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

Late last month, Meta withdrew a policy advisory opinion (PAO) request related to Russia\u2019s invasion of Ukraine that had previously been referred to the Oversight Board<\/a>. This decision was not made lightly \u2014 the PAO was withdrawn due to ongoing safety and security concerns.<\/p>\n

While the PAO has been withdrawn, we stand by our efforts related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and believe we are taking the right steps to protect speech and balance the ongoing security concerns on the ground.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In response, the board said in a statement that it is \u201cdisappointed\u201d by the move:<\/p>\n

\n

While the Board understands these concerns, we believe the request raises important issues and are disappointed by the company\u2019s decision to withdraw it. The Board also notes the withdrawal of this request does not diminish Meta\u2019s responsibility to carefully consider the ongoing content moderation issues which have arisen from this war, which the Board continues to follow. Indeed, the importance for the company to defend freedom of expression and human rights has only increased.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Both statements were extremely vague, so I spent a day talking with people familiar with the matter who could fill me in on what happened. Here\u2019s what I\u2019ve learned.<\/p>\n

One of the most disturbing trends of the past year has been the way that authoritarian governments in general, and Russia in particular, have used the intimidation of employees on the ground to force platforms to do their bidding. Last fall, Apple and Google both removed from their respective stores an app that enabled anti-Putin forces to organize before an election<\/a>. In the aftermath, we learned that Russian agents had threatened their employees, in person, with jail time or worse.<\/p>\n

Life for those employees \u2014 and their families \u2014 has only become more difficult since Putin\u2019s invasion. The country passed draconian laws outlawing truthful discussion of the war<\/a>, and the combination of those laws and sanctions from the United States and Europe has forced many platforms to withdraw services from Russia entirely.<\/p>\n

In the wake of Meta\u2019s decision to allow calls for violence against the invaders, Russia said that Meta had engaged in \u201cextremist\u201d activities<\/a>. That potentially put hundreds of Meta employees at risk of being jailed. And while the company has now successfully removed its employees from the country, the extremism language could mean that they will never be allowed to return to the country so long as they work at Meta. Moreover, it could mean that employees\u2019 families in Russia could still be subject to persecution.<\/p>\n

There is precedent for both outcomes under Russia\u2019s extremism laws.<\/p>\n

So what does the Oversight Board have to do with it?<\/p>\n

Meta had asked for a fairly broad opinion about its approach to moderation and Russia. The board has already shown a willingness to make expansive policy recommendations, even on narrower cases submitted by users. After asking for the opinion, the company\u2019s legal and security teams became concerned that anything the board said might somehow be used against employees or their families in Russia, either now or in the future.<\/p>\n

Technically, the Oversight Board is a distinct entity from Meta. But plenty of Westerners still refuse to recognize that distinction, and company lawyers worried that Russia wouldn\u2019t, either.<\/p>\n

\n