![]() In 2019, tech companies such as Blizzard have been brought to shame by caving to the demands of China and censoring their own users amid rebellion in Hong Kong. ![]() Constitution-centric approach to freedom of speech, rather than one that would hold free speaking western nations and foreign authoritarian regimes as equals. But Facebook, as an American company, serves human dignity far better by having an U.S. While it may seem good on the surface to have diversity - having multiple cultures and nations represented - many nations have wildly differing standards on freedom of speech and expression. “When we announce, you’re going to see that this isn’t just a board that looks like Silicon Valley or looks like Facebook.” “Almost any person on the planet may not like one or two people who are on the board, and we think that’s a feature,” he commented to reporters. Can such an openly “intolerant” company be trusted to hire objective members to be on its oversight board?įacebook Director of Governance and Global Affairs Brent Harris claimed that there will be a diverse range of members overseeing content on Facebook and Instagram. While its actual members will be chosen and announced “n the coming months,” Facebook staff did reveal that “the first Director of Oversight Board Administration will be Thomas Hughes.” Hughes was described as the “former Executive Director for Article 19, an international non-governmental organization with a focus on freedom of expression and digital rights” who will “lead the board’s administrative staff.”Īccording to The Verge, Hughes claimed the board will ensure that “the rights of people are respected.” He also claimed that it will ensure “accountability and transparency in the application of the community standards.”Ĭan conservatives depend on Hughes to defend their personal liberties, or is he merely the token free speech advocate to help protect Facebook from being regulated? Facebook, like other Silicon Valley Big Tech companies, has an “ intolerant” liberal culture, even according to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg himself. 28 which announced the platform’s upcoming oversight board. The site’s in-house newsroom posted a developer blog on Jan. “When you decide to take down someone’s entire account, and to ban their speech, you really deprive them of their right to association and their right to live their lives.Will Facebook’s new oversight board be the platform to ensure free speech or a Big Tech kangaroo court? “We hear so much about Donald Trump and about high-profile actors that have been censored by Facebook, but there are thousands of people whose accounts have been taken down and the board is their last source to get it back from Facebook. ![]() “The reason we’re talking about content moderation right now is that it’s started to happen to powerful people,” Klonick told the committee. Even if that takes many sessions with coders talking very slowly so that we understand them, I think we need to understand what these machines are.”Īppearing alongside Rusbridger was legal academic Kate Klonick, who shadowed the board as it was set up. “People say to me, ‘Oh, you’re on the board, but it’s well known that the algorithms reward emotional content that polarises communities because that makes it more addictive.’ Well I don’t know if that’s true or not, and as a board we’re going to have to get to grips with that. Because it is going to be a very difficult thing to understand how this artificial intelligence works,” Rusbridger said. “I think we need more technology people on the board who can give us independent advice from Facebook. Now the board is in the process of finding another 20 board members without Facebook’s direct involvement. Facebook selected the first 20 members, in conjunction with four co-chairs directly appointed by the social network. Whether we’ll understand when we see it is a different matter.”īefore the board would be able to examine the Facebook algorithm, Rusbridger suggested it would need to expand its numbers. ![]() At some point we’re going to ask to see the algorithm, I feel sure, whatever that means. But we have to get our feet under the table first, and prove that we can do what we want. “These are all things that the board may ask Facebook for in time. “What happens if you want to make something less viral? What happens if you want to put up an interstitial? What happens if, without commenting on any high-profile current cases, you didn’t want to ban someone for life but wanted to put them in a ‘sin bin’ so that if they misbehave again you can chuck them off? “We’re already a bit frustrated by just saying ‘take it down’ or ‘leave it up’,” Rusbridger told the House of Lords communications and digital committee on Tuesday. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |