Meta’s Oversight Board has decided it’s time to hear people’s opinion on how hate speech, and more specifically speech against immigration, should be regulated. The board is pursuing a probe into how the hateful immigration posts are dealt with on Facebook; this call recommends the involvement of the community regarding its assessment.
Hate Speech Under Review Meta Seeks Your Voice for a Safer Online Space
In its statement, the board provided two examples of when Facebook moderators decided that, contentious content should remain visible. These are some of the cases that we wanted to highlight to show the, again many-layered nature of moderation decisions and their effect on marginalised groups particularly refugees and asylum seekers.
The Oversight Board is most worried about the current Meta’s policy, which does not afford substantial immunity to immigrants. Because of this, the board intends to engage the public and establish whether there is sufficient guidance in place to protect these vulnerable groups of people who suffer from online hostility.
Stakeholder participation is essential in this context so that everyone’s opinion is captured in the board’s decisions. The Pub Policy Forum allows participants to discuss their opinions regarding how hate speech policies should be changed to enhance the situation in social media.
The more the conversation progresses, the more Meta’s consistency in practicing transparency and accountability in moderating content will be in question. The board’s conclusions will be not only Meta’s guidelines but also an example for the company and other social networks to solve the issue of recognizing and eradicating the hate speech.
Meta's Oversight Board Independent Yet Funded
Meta’s Oversight Board while being funded by the social media giant has enough autonomy to make non-biased reviews of the content moderation policies. Once public comments are gathered, the board can provide Meta with advisory policy recommendations — non-binding ones — to enhance how the platform addresses subjects such as hate speech in the production process.
From one of the board the following example was presented This one is connected with a Facebook page of a Polish far-right coalition party. In May, this page has posted a meme that contains the word, which is considered by many to be an insult among Poles, directed at Black people.
The above post received a lot of attention and you can see that it remains active with over 150000 views, and it was shared over 400 times. Nonetheless, after an examination by human moderators and after 250 comments and 15 user complains of hate speech, Meta left the post online.
This case brings necessary questions for Meta about its content moderation policies and, specifically, the efficacy of the human review in preventing hate speech. Review of such cases by the board clearly indicates the importance of further discussion of the role of social media in preventing negative content.
While considering the public opinion and certain cases, the role of the Oversight Board might be critically important when determining the subsequent policy at Meta. Some of the board’s suggestions may regard the capacity to enforce or lessen freedom of expression in the light of setting up a safe environment on the Internet for everybody.
Meta’s Oversight Board Is Investigating 3 Promising but Problematic Posts
In a recent case, a Germany based FB page posted a sickening image of a blond, blue eyed women with her hand raised in what can only be interpreted as a stop gesture. In the accompanying text there were some widely provocative statements about immigrants and that Germany has no need for ‘’ Gang Rape specialists.’’ In this particular case, Meta deemed the post as being adversative, yet they remained inactive after the review was done by a human.
Though, retaining this image has once again become a debate after Meta’s Oversight Board questioned the moderation policies of the platform. Subsequently, the policy experts at Meta again scrutinized both this case and another from Poland but maintained the board’s decisions made at the initial stage of the process.
The story above shows the current problems of social media in fighting hatred speech and discriminations alongside freedom of speech. The Oversight Board’s investigation to is intended to offer oversight and critical evaluation of whether Meta currently has policies in place to sufficiently shield its users from toxic content.
The cases are important in the formation of future policy, and according to Helle Thorning-Schmidt, the Co-chair of the Oversight Board and the former Prime Minister of Denmark, there is no better way to decide on the futures policy than through a case by case basis. She said they could also be used to make Meta prove whether it is addressing the right things to reduce hate speech or not.
The results of the board’s further investigation can be taxing for Meta and suggest viable solutions to address a highly controversial issue of hate speech moderation across the most popular social media platforms globally.
