The Meta-funded, but supposedly “independent” Oversight Board woke up again with its list pretentious goals and “priorities” moving forward.
Meta’s Oversight Board identified seven strategic priorities where they want to work with stakeholders in order to reshape Meta’s approach to content moderating. The board pointed out that Meta censored too little or too much in each of the categories. The board prioritized “gender” as a priority area for future changes to Meta’s content policy. The board also addressed election-related censure in non-American countries. They urged Meta to be more transparent in censoring users to avoid the “perception of unequal treatment”.
The board lumped “women”, “trans people” in one group, suggesting that both groups face “obstacles” when using social media. The Oversight Board stated that women, non-binary and trans people face obstacles in exercising their rights to freedom to express themselves on social media. The board seems to have forgotten that women’s interests are not always the same as those of “nonbinary” and “trans” people.
The Oversight Board’s only example of an actual false equivalency was its “breast cancer symptoms” and nudity decision. The board explained that Meta’s automated systems did not apply exceptions for breast-cancer awareness, which led to important health information being removed on Instagram.
When the Oversight Board touched on free speech for election related content, it revealed its globalist priorities. The board wrote that it had highlighted the importance protecting political expression in its “pro-Navalny protests Russia” decision. However, the “mention of the Taliban in news reports” decision addressed issues of media freedom, seemingly praising itself.
It was notable that the write-up did not mention the American company’s handling U.S. election-related content prior to the contentious 2022 midterm elections.
The board also failed to address the unfair or unequal treatment for censored users. Priorities list members complained that certain users are given more transparency than others, and that not all users have the right to appeal. The board didn’t seem to have a problem with censorship as such, but rather the fact the lack of transparency gave the illusion of equal treatment.
“When someone’s content is removed on Facebook or Instagram, they aren’t always told which rule they broke and a lack transparency can lead to the perception that users are not being treated equally,” Meta’s Oversight Board wrote.
Conservatives are being attacked! Contact Facebook headquarters at (650-308-7300) and demand that Big Tech be held accountable to the First Amendment while providing transparency and clarity on hate speech and equal footing to conservatives. Contact us at the Media Research Center contact page if you feel your voice has been silenced.
