Facebook's content oversight body is accepting public comments on the social network's decision to indefinitely ban Donald Trump from posting on his account amid concerns that the now-former president could spark violence like the January 6 riot Capitol Hill.
The board is soliciting public opinion on a number of issues related to the suspension, including whether the decision is in line with Facebook's "Responsibility to Respect Freedom of Expression and Human Rights" and how the company may conduct potentially dangerous activities outside the country social network should balance in its decisions. The public has until February 8th to submit entries.
Top tips from the editors
Subscribe to CNET Now for the day's most engaging reviews, news, and videos.
CEO Mark Zuckerberg made the unprecedented decision to ban Trump a day after whipping supporters at a rally held during Congress to confirm the election of Joe Biden as president.
"We believe that the risk that the president can continue to use our service during this time is simply too great," Zuckerberg said at the time in a Facebook post. "That is why we are extending the block that we have placed on his Facebook and Instagram accounts indefinitely and for at least the next two weeks until the peaceful change of power is complete."
The social network banned Trump indefinitely after the Capitol uprising earlier this month, citing two posts during the attack. One of them included a video of Trump telling the rioters that he "loved" them and falsely claiming that the election was "stolen from us". In a separate post he reiterated the false claim of victory and suggested that the uprising was justified.
Other social networks, including Twitter, YouTube, and Snapchat, have also cracked down on Trump to varying degrees.
The review requested by Facebook follows the decisions of the board of directors in its first list of cases, which included hate speech, incitement to violence and other sensitive topics. The whiteboard overturned Four of the content moderation decisions on Facebook call for post recovery.
Continue reading: So can you Appeal on Facebook's new board of directors.
Facebook gets a supervisory body
Critics of Facebook, which was used by Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election, say it does not take its responsibilities seriously enough and does not believe that the board of directors is going fast enough or far enough. A group of vocal critics has created a shadow organization they call the Real Facebook Oversight Board.
Here's what you need to know about Facebook's governing body:
Sounds like this board has a lot of responsibility. What can I do?
Let's get something clear: the board of directors won't do the same job as content moderators, who decide whether individual posts on Facebook comply with the rules of the social network. The board is supposed to support the "right to freedom of expression" of the 2.7 billion Facebook users.
The board works very much like a court, which is not surprising given that a Harvard law professor came up with the idea. Users who believe that content moderators improperly removed their posts can contact the board for a second opinion. When the board joins the user, Facebook needs to restore the post. Facebook can also forward cases to the board.
The board of directors can also make suggestions for changes to Facebook's policies. Over time, these recommendations could affect what users are allowed to post, which could make content easier to moderate.
Why does Facebook need a board of directors at all?
Facebook is criticized by almost everyone for almost every decision it makes. Conservatives say the company - and the rest of Silicon Valley - are biased against their views. They point to bans by right-wing provocateurs Alex Jones and Milo Yiannopoulos to support their case.
The social network is not very much loved by progressives either. They complain that Facebook has become a toxic swamp of racist, sexist, and misleading language. In July, some progressive groups underscored their concerns by telling companies not to advertise on Facebook and using the hashtag #StopHateForProfit to publicize the boycott.
The board of directors can help Facebook deal with these complaints while adding credibility to the social network's community standards, a code of conduct that prohibits hate speech, child nudity, and a variety of other objectionable content. By an independent board's decision on this content, Facebook is hoping to develop a more consistent application of its rules, which have led to complaints of random appearances in the past.
An example: Facebook's removal of a legendary Vietnam War photo from 2016, in which a naked girl flees from a napalm attack. The company defended the distance, saying the Pulitzer Prize-winning image violated its rules on child nudity. She overturned her decision shortly afterward as global criticism increased and prompted COO Sheryl Sandberg to apologize to the Norwegian Prime Minister.
Got it. But why does Facebook need to create an independent organization?
It's no secret that Facebook has a trust problem. Regulators, politicians, and the general public wonder whether the decisions the company makes serve its users or themselves. The company's independence of Facebook's board of directors should, in the company's view, give people confidence that its decisions will be made on the merits and not based on the company's interests.
OK. So who chose Facebook to be on this forum?
Earlier this year, Facebook named the first 20 board members, which include former judges and current lawyers, as well as professors and journalists. This includes a former Prime Minister and a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate. The board could eventually be expanded to 40 people.
The social network chose a diverse group. Members have lived in almost 30 countries and speak almost as many languages. About a quarter come from the USA and Canada.
At the time of the announcement, Helle Thorning-Schmidt, who served as Danish Prime Minister from 2011 to 2015, said one of the board's greatest advantages is removing some of the responsibility for moderating content from Facebook itself. Decision-making is currently too central.
"Social media can spread hateful, deceptive, and harmful language," she said. "And so far, some of the toughest decisions regarding content have been made by Facebook, and one could say, ultimately, by Mark Zuckerberg."
Board membership is a part-time employment with members being paid through a multi-million dollar trust. The term of office of the board members is three years. The board of directors has the authority to select future members. Cases are heard in committees of five randomly selected members.
Wait a minute. Facebook pays the board? Is it really independent?
If you are skeptical, we will hear you. Facebook doesn't have a good reputation for transparency.
However, the Board Establishment Charter provides details of the efforts Facebook is making to maintain board independence. For example, the board is not a subsidiary of Facebook; It is a separate unit with its own head office and staff. It has its own website (in 18 languages if you count US and UK English separately) and its own Twitter account.
When it comes to money, the board is indirectly funded by Facebook through the trust. Facebook is funding the trust with $ 130 million, which is estimated to cover years of expenses.
Facebook says it will stick to the board's decisions even if it disagrees with a judgment. (The social network says the only exceptions would be decisions that would force it to break the law, which is unlikely given the legal background of many board members.)
The board will also seek to hold Facebook accountable and publish an annual report that includes a review of Facebook's actions as a result of its decisions.
"It will be very embarrassing for Facebook," said Thorning-Schmidt, "if they don't live up to this end of this bargain."
