Facebook Board Keeps Trump Ban -- With 6-Month Review
Facebook's Oversight Board backed the Jan. 7 decision to restrict then-President Donald Trump's access to the social media website and Instagram account, but said Wednesday it wasn't "appropriate" to impose an indefinite and standardless suspension. Facebook responded that the suspension stands.
The board said Facebook should "review this matter to determine and justify a proportionate response" consistent with rules it applies to others. It recommended policies to help develop "clear, necessary, and proportionate policies that promote public safety and respect freedom of expression." The decision said Trump's two Jan. 6 posts -- one telling protesters storming the Capitol, "We love you. You're very special," the other calling the rioters "great patriots" and urging them to "remember this day forever" -- "severely violated" Facebook and Instagram community guidelines. By maintaining an "unfounded narrative of electoral fraud and persistent calls to action," Trump "created an environment where a serious risk of violence was possible." Given the seriousness of the breaches and the ongoing risk of violence, Facebook was justified in suspending the accounts, the decision said.
However, "it was not appropriate for Facebook to impose an 'indefinite' suspension" given lack of restoration criteria, the board said: The company didn't follow a clear, published procedure because content policies don't describe indefinite suspensions. Facebook is responsible for creating necessary and proportionate penalties that respond to severe violations, the in-house group said. "In applying a vague, standardless penalty and then referring this case to the Board to resolve, Facebook seeks to avoid its responsibilities."
Within six months, the company must reassess its arbitrary penalty and decide on an appropriate remedy. Among recommendations: The same rules should apply to all and context matters when assessing probability and imminence of harm, and Facebook should address "widespread confusion about how decisions relating to influential users are made." It should "rapidly escalate" content containing political speech from highly influential users to specialized staff and do a comprehensive review of its potential contribution to the narrative of electoral fraud that culminated in the Jan. 6 violence.
Facebook is "pleased the board has recognized that the unprecedented circumstances justified the exceptional measure we took," said Vice President-Global Affairs and Communications Nick Clegg. He criticized the panel for not specifying the appropriate duration of the suspension and instead ordering the company to review its response. Facebook will consider the decision, but "Mr. Trump's accounts remain suspended." The recommendations aren't binding, and Facebook will "carefully review" them, he said. Trump's representatives didn't comment.
Access Now, which defends digital users' rights, wants more public oversight than the Facebook board can offer. Appropriate models could be publicly funded bodies in Europe such as independent regulatory authorities, and independent press councils, said Policy Director Javier Pallero in an interview. Any such oversight body must be separately funded and not subject to regulatory capture, he said.
Whether Trump is "on the platform or not, Facebook and other social media platforms with the same business model will find ways to highlight divisive content to drive advertising revenues," tweeted House Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, D-N.J. Accountability will come with a law, he said. Ranking member Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., called the situation "Orwellian" and urged Congress to act. The decision makes clear that "Mark Zuckerberg views himself as the arbiter of free speech," said Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.
Suspending Trump "does little to repair the structural rot at the heart of Facebook's hate-and-lie-for-profit business model," said Free Press, deeming the oversight board little more than a "PR exercise." Upholding the ban was "completely justified" and the board had good reason to go further and maintain Facebook’s authority to make the ban permanent, said TechFreedom. It's a "win for transparency and fairness" whether one agrees or disagrees with it, said the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. Public Citizen agreed with the board minority that urged Facebook to ensure that users who seek reinstatement after suspension recognize their wrongdoing and commit to obeying the rules. It said Trump should be permanently barred because of the "enormous harm" his posts caused.