The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
We Are a New Board at Facebook. Here’s What We’ll Decide.
The company’s independent oversight body will focus on challenging content issues, such as hate speech and harassment.
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Social media affects people’s lives in many ways, good and bad. Right now, as the world endures a health crisis, social media has become a lifeline for many people, providing valuable information and helping families and communities stay connected.

At the same time, we know that social media can spread speech that is hateful, harmful and deceitful. In recent years, the question of what content should stay up or come down on platforms like Facebook, and who should decide this, has become increasingly urgent.

So in November 2018, recognizing that no company should settle these issues alone, Facebook committed to creating an independent oversight body that will review Facebook’s decisions about what content to take down or leave up. Over the past 18 months, more than 2,000 experts and other relevant parties from 88 countries have contributed feedback that has shaped the development of this oversight board, which will have 20 members (ultimately growing to 40) and is scheduled to become operational this year.

The oversight board will focus on the most challenging content issues for Facebook, including in areas such as hate speech, harassment, and protecting people’s safety and privacy. It will make final and binding decisions on whether specific content should be allowed or removed from Facebook and Instagram (which Facebook owns).

Today, the first set of members of the oversight board is being announced. We are the four co-chairs. After Facebook selected us, we considered a large number of individuals for the oversight board, including those recommended by the public, before we interviewed and ultimately approved the 16 other members being announced today.

The board members come from different professional, cultural and religious backgrounds and have various political viewpoints. Some of us have been publicly critical of Facebook; some of us haven’t. But all of us have training and experience that can help the board in considering the most significant content decisions facing online communities. We are all independent of Facebook. And we are all committed to freedom of expression within the framework of international norms of human rights. We will make decisions based on those principles and on the effects on Facebook users and society, without regard to the economic, political or reputational interests of the company.

• Category: Ideology • Tags: Censorship, Facebook 
Hide 48 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Four co-chairs LOL. Sounds like a PTA.

  2. Some of us have been publicly critical of Facebook … We are all independent of Facebook.

    A lot of mavericks, a lot of motives, AKA ‘shareholders’..shocking

  3. Anonymous[359] • Disclaimer says:

    Zuck has to pretend to care, innit?

    After that disastrous interview, Zuck not only mastered PR but seems to actually enjoy bamboozling his data cows, aka dumbfucks.

    • Replies: @trickster
  4. Chris Moore says: • Website

    The board members come from different professional, cultural and religious backgrounds and have various political viewpoints.

    Yet another bureaucracy to launder Facebook/Instagram’s censorship of the ZOG issue, and give it an imprimatur of authenticity. Basically, they’re weighing authentic free speech for kosher compliance, and will grant it a “pluralist” kosher seal, or not.

    Ironic that history’s most tenacious racists (the fake-Jew, Hebrew fascists and their partners in crime) have set themselves up as judge, jury and executioner on the question of “hate.” I guess it’s appropriate, given that they know how to project hate more than anyone, and how to sneak through hateful, murderous wars of aggression that serve their gang, and then blame them on the “Deplorable” majority if they go bad.

    They basically pull some variation of this same modus operandi in every nation they infest.

    Who are the knuckle-draggers stupid, greedy and psychotic enough to get into bed with the “liberal” chosenites and “conservative” Hebrew fascists? That’s the nest of vipers coalition where you’ll find the real hate. But they’ll scapegoat anyone who speaks out against them. What else would one expect from a soulless organization of sociopaths?

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
  5. jsinton says:

    We will control the horizontal.
    We will control the vertical.
    We can roll the image, or make it flutter.
    We can change the focus to a sharp blur,
    or sharpen it to crystal clarity.

    • Replies: @Weston Waroda
  6. A123 says:

    It has to better than Amazon’s system of letting vile SPLC hatemongers control content.

    One concedes that is a pretty low bar.

    PEACE 😷

  7. MarkinPNW says:

    Just today, when trying to post links to a couple of Paul Kersey’s articles on Facebook, found out that does not meet Facebook’s “community standards” guidelines. Ended up posting his name without links with a suggestion for readers to do their own search.

  8. The state sees free speech as such a threat to its power that it will now create a panel of “experts” to make sure the “wrong” ideas do not circulate among the proles.

    • Agree: Realist
  9. Facebook owned by lying Jews. Nothing to see here. You can find all types of blacks hating everyone. Major sites have been taken down for even mentioning what Israel does to the Palestinians. Jamal Green another black genius lawyer from Harvard. He is supposed to be a constitutional law expert. Here’s a quote about the First Amendment:

    “Technological change has transformed our speech environment in ways we’re only beginning to understand,” said Greene. “This series will give serious thinkers and professionals a chance to step back and think more deeply about the values free speech is designed to promote and how the First Amendment can remain vibrant into the 21st century.”

    No Dickhead! Free speech doesn’t have to promote anything especially values. Who’s values? And the First Amendment can remain vibrant…..what the fuck! Just another fucking Commie Black Lawyer from the Ivy League.

    Maybe he’ll find out what the Second Amendment is about and it’s not about hunting or self defense. It’s about protecting the First from your Vibrant Value destruction of it.

  10. @Chris Moore

    Oh really, Chris Moore, how can you say all those things!

    Don’t you know the Jewish people are on a charm offensive?

    Elan Carr is investing American taxpayer dollars in the cause of “making people love Jews.”

    US will push countries to love their Jews more, anti-Semitism monitor says.

    That’s right: the people who brought you
    Hate Germans
    Hate Palestinians
    Hate Iranians
    Hate White / European Americans

    are about to do a Linda Blair

  11. @jsinton

    You are stretching me to my outer limits. I begged mom and dad to let me stay up late to watch. I share your childhood terror of the episode of the ghostly ship with the seaweed, with dead sailors. You boomer.

  12. @Mike Whitney

    Yes, but they are foolish to do so. Just today a video I watched yesterday was removed from YouTube for “violating our community standards.” I was wishy washy about the video itself, but now that it has been deplatformed, I will definitely be looking further into the ideas presented there.

    In the free marketplace of ideas, you debate and question, you just let all the ideas in, and the truth is left standing at the end. But when somebody puts his thumb on the scales, people who think are able to see that, and they will wonder why. And then they will look further. I suppose that is what American Pravda is all about. Where would we be without our digital samizdat?

    • Replies: @Oldtradesman
  13. @Weston Waroda

    “I was wishy washy about the video itself, but now that it has been deplatformed, I will definitely be looking further into the ideas presented there.”

    You represent a tiny minority of the population. Not so bad in and of itself. Problem is, more than half of that subset is nuts and none of its sane members are billionaires. That’s one reason why we always lose.

    • Replies: @Weston Waroda
  14. Franz says:

    Alone, perhaps, I applaud all this. Make it worse since the only out now is an uprising of some sort.

    For some years now a small but devoted bunch of us have noted, and said, that the difference between Corporate power and Government power depends on your connections.

    A quarter-century ago, Sam Francis argued against outfits such as the Anti-Defimation League, because as “private” spy agencies they could get the goods on somebody, pass it on to the government and let them prosecute. This is due to the fact the ADL can use techniques that would be illegal if done by government.

    That was then.

    Now, the Government-Corporate Axis is joined at the hip — and who, seeing what’s president, could even imagine otherwise?

    Pulled by Facebook, ghosted by Google? Censored. As sure as if the US Gov had a High Office of Official Censorship. With one exception: The government probably hasn’t a tenth of the financial muscle the private sector has.

    Anti-government, pro-corporate tards gave them this on a silver platter. The end zone of Buckley conservatism is a perfect vice where the rich guys can squeeze us all from either direction.

  15. Wally says:
    @Mike Whitney

    – Once again, the greatest enabler of today’s Zionist Totalitarianism goes unmentioned here, the ridiculously fake and utterly impossible “holocaust” narrative.

    -Free speech on that contrived narrative is banned in many countries because it cannot withstand rational, scientific scrutiny.

    Get off your knees. Only lies require censorship.

    The ‘6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are scientifically impossible frauds.
    See the ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here:
    No name calling, level playing field debate here:

  16. Levtraro says:

    If I tried to care less about FB internal politics I would have to make an effort, which would be caring too much. FB is unimportamt and irrelevant. Their censoring is not a public issue. FB is a private advertising company.

    • Agree: fish
    • Replies: @Brás Cubas
    , @fish
  17. Fropm the Middle East Eye: Facebook deactivates dozens of accounts of Palestinian journalists and activists

    “Anything I posted was at risk of being taken down,” Khweira said. “If I posted videos of settler attacks on farmers, or of clashes with Israeli soldiers, it would be taken down.”

    Even a simple post announcing the news that a Palestinian had been killed by Israeli forces would get deleted from his page for violating “Community Standards.”

    Both Jibreen and Khweira reported issues with posting livestreams on Facebook, saying that they, along with several of their colleagues, would often be prevented from going live on their accounts, a “glitch” that they were unable to fix.

    “We are certain that the deactivation of all of our accounts was made at the request of the Israeli government,” Jibreen told MEE.

    “Israel does not want people, especially the international community, to see what’s happening on the ground in Palestine,” he continued.

  18. Who cares about the board?
    The rules are the problem.

  19. “Gucci Helle” the narcissistic selfie shiksa is an interesting pick on the Facebook “Supreme Court” given past blemishes notably the Goldman Sachs scandal back home.

    I suspect Nick Clegg, part Jewish David Cameron’s former political partner, is behind this plus she is married to the son of a former UK Labour Party leader.

  20. Digital book-burning. Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 was published in 1953. His prediction has come true.

    “At the same time, we know that (books) can spread speech that is hateful, harmful and deceitful. In recent years, the question of what content should (be published and available in libraries), and who should decide this, has become increasingly urgent.”

    • Agree: SolontoCroesus
    • Replies: @Brás Cubas
  21. Biff says:

    After Facebook selected us,

    All we need to know, and the rest is hate speech. I was offended by every sentence, and I’m now suing for punitive damages. Facebook is a dirty eight letter word!

  22. EoinW says:

    I got a good laugh the other day. I changed my cover photo to one showing the Red Army liberating Berlin and hoisting the Soviet flag over the Reichstag. That got blacked out pretty fast. I guess historic photos are verboten unless they show FB’s version of history. BTW I reposted it the next day and got a 24 hr ban. After that, I decided to stop before Luca Brazzi visited me and I found a horse’s head in my bed.

  23. @Beavertales

    His prediction has come true.

    No, it hasn’t. If someone predicts that *the State* will turn into a censoring monster and, instead, a *private entity* does, I would say that the author failed miserably in his predictions.

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
  24. @Levtraro

    FB is unimportamt and irrelevant.

    Considering Facebook has over 2.6 billion monthly active users, I don’t see how it could be unimportant or irrelevant.

  25. trickster says:

    Yeah ! And Zuck rhymes with ………???

  26. @Brás Cubas

    Can you make a strong case that * The State* [as we know it today] and FB and numerous “private entities” are not inextricably fused?

    In his Mar 13 2020 speech declaring a state of emergency, Trump stated, “We have 1700 Google engineers working on this already . . .”

    Or try this at home: contact your US representative and demand that FB be subjected to anti-trust scrutiny. Get back to us.

    • Replies: @Brás Cubas
  27. trickster says:

    The article said, and I abbreviated it somewhat, the following

    ” As the world endures a health crisis social media has become a lifeline for many, providing info and helping everyone stay connected”

    Huh ? For the past 40,000 years it seems to me that people stayed connected WITHOUT Facebook. In the pioneer years the Pony Express did the deed, further back during the exploration of North and South America a letter might take 18 months to arrive from Europe and the reply another 18 months that is if they ever arrived. Further back people used horses and runners. In WW1 pigeons and runners were used. Finally, there is that magnificent invention tah dah the telephone ! And then another great invention…wait for it….email. Want to stay connected pick up the phone and call or send an email.

    I have never had a FB account. If anyone wants to know how the Trickster is doing they can call or email. Otherwise they can fuck off. If I want to know how Uncle Bob or Grandma are doing I will call.

    What FB has become is a forum where people post every little bit of stupid shit some on a minute by minute basis. As I said in another comment the Zuk recognises that people have an inordinate desire for recognition, approval, applause. They also want to be “friends” with others they barely know. I see and hear information being shared on FB that personally I would not share with my priest at confession. Yet it is blazed all over social media for the world to see and read.

    The Zuk seems to have convinced the majority that they really need this medium. Once that task was accomplished the site now proceeds to dictate its terms and conditions. If everyone were to abandon the site it would collapse, and so would the Z, because FB produces nothing. It feeds off the bullshit, oops, I meant valuable information users post. Users have given Zuk the rope, the cross beam, the weighted bag and the lever to the trap door. Why are they surprised he is mining their information.?

    Why are they surprised he is going to hang them ?

    Want to neutralize the site ? STOP using it ! This will never happen of course because the herd is dumb and is sold on the illusion this is a “lifeline”.

    • Agree: Realist
  28. fish says:

    FB is a private advertising company.

    More important than that…..FleeceBook is a company run by a wanker for the enstupidation (thanks Fred) of wankers!

  29. @Oldtradesman

    We few, we happy few, we band of brothers.

  30. Realist says:

    Having corporate censorship is the Deep States way of getting around the First Amendment.

  31. Realist says:
    @Brás Cubas

    Considering Facebook has over 2.6 billion monthly active users, I don’t see how it could be unimportant or irrelevant.

    The fact that there are over 2.6 billion dumbasses doing something does not confer importance or relevance to an action.

    It’s quality…not quantity.

    • Replies: @Brás Cubas
  32. Realist says:
    @Brás Cubas

    “The state”?

    Yes, the Deep State.

    • LOL: Brás Cubas
  33. Levtraro says:
    @Brás Cubas

    Well, billions vote for their masters, does it matter much? Not according to Gilens and Page (2014):

    • Replies: @Brás Cubas
  34. eah says:

    I already know roughly how all of that will go.

  35. @SolontoCroesus

    I agree that the link exists between the State and Private Monopolies. But does Fahrenheit 451 allude to a similar structure? It’s been some time since I read it (or watched the movie, I don’t remember which). Or is it just a denunciation of a totalitarian State, in the vaguest of terms? If you are OK with all-purpose prophecies, maybe it’ll do for you.

    Bradbury was probably the worst writer that ever existed. That book burning thing is the only thing he gets constantly remembered by. I, for one, wish he were remembered by this:

    “[President George W. Bush] is wonderful. We needed him. Clinton is a sh*thead and we’re glad to be rid of him.” — August 2001,

  36. @Levtraro

    I don’t understand your reasoning. That seem to strengthen the importance of social media, doesn’t it?

    • Replies: @Levtraro
  37. @Realist

    Well, getting 2.6 billion dumbasses doing *one* something is pretty quality herdsmanship, it seems.

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @Dumb4asterisks
  38. Realist says:
    @Brás Cubas

    Well, getting 2.6 billion dumbasses doing *one* something is pretty quality herdsmanship, it seems.

    Still doesn’t confer importance or relevance.

  39. @Brás Cubas

    I feel strangely flattered with all the references here to myself.
    But please get it right: Zuck said I am a dumb**** for trusting him, not a dumb*** (American spelling). Although, I grant it can be confusing depending on one’s POV.

  40. @Brás Cubas

    Considering Facebook has over 2.6 billion monthly active users, I don’t see how it could be unimportant or irrelevant.

    That has, afaik, a lot to do with the lil detail that it’s synonym with “Internet” for brown and black people.

  41. Levtraro says:
    @Brás Cubas

    Sorry for being too terse.

    My reasoning is that many things that billions do (such as joining FB or voting for their masters) are not necessarily very important or relevant to the impact of websites like the UR (In fact Ron Unz posted that the ban on FB caused a drop of 20% in traffic, which is significant but it is not major considering thet FB is such an important thing, supposedly).

    As proof I showed you the study by Gilens and Page which pretty convincingly shows that policy in the USA is created and maintained by the tiny minority of the masters of business, money and paper shuffling, not by the millions that vote for their masters.

    The impact of websites such as this, if there is any impact at all, happens among the few that matter. Thus FB ban is unimportant and irrelevant.

  42. Dube says:

    Thanks for Marcuse’s Repressive Tolerance. I recall that Billy Graham at the time put out a pamphlet titled, The Sin of Tolerance. I say thanks, because at last I have a chance to share a smile about these two preachers and their preachments. It would be worth a comparison and contrast. They probably did not consult each other.

  43. @EoinW

    Are you German or is the distinction between occupying and liberating unknown to you?

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Catalina Botero-Marino, Jamal Greene, Michael W. McConnell and Helle Thorning-Schmidt Comments via RSS
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Talk TV sensationalists and axe-grinding ideologues have fallen for a myth of immigrant lawlessness.