The council looked at two messages that have been removed on the grounds of hate speech. Facebook has to put one of them back, partly because the supervisory board uses a different translation and therefore reads the message differently. This concludes that the text is not derogatory or violent.
The other message, which Facebook has rightly removed on the grounds of hate speech, according to the council, is about the use of a specific Russian word to indicate Azerbaijan. Council language experts confirm that Facebook’s reading of the word is correct and therefore offensive in nature.
Criticism of automated removal
The nudity case is an exception: Facebook had already restored the post. This is a message with eight photos, which were part of a campaign to draw attention to breast cancer symptoms. Nipples of female breasts were visible in five of the photos, not in the other three.
According to the council, Facebook did not want a judgment on this, after all, the platform had already recovered the message. The council thought otherwise and points to the fact that the message had been deleted by Facebook’s automatic system. “The incorrect removal of this message indicates insufficient human oversight, leading to human rights concerns.”
In addition, it is pointed out that Facebook’s rules treat the nipples of men and women differently. “This uses incorrect automation, which disproportionately affects women’s freedom of expression.”
The fourth case involved a quote from Nazi leader Joseph Goebbels, quoted by a user who wanted to compare Trump’s presidency to the Nazi regime.
Criticism of government policy
The latest case concerns a message in which a French user speaks out about the use of agents to combat the coronavirus, including hydroxychloroquine. According to Facebook, there was disinformation, according to the council it is criticism of government policy.
The council also advises Facebook on a number of points. For example, it is recommended to provide more information to users about why something is being removed and there is criticism of a lack of transparency in this area. In addition, Facebook is advised to draw up clearer rules when it comes to tackling medical misinformation. The platform does not have to follow the advice.
–
