Difference between revisions of "Facebook's Oversight Committee"
From BigTechWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
* Facebook’s Oversight Board has been called out as a “toothless” PR stunt that the company used to “[co-opt] advocates and academics who would otherwise be more critical of the company.” In 2020, Facebook executives announced a new Oversight Board, which would be tasked with issuing recommendations on controversial content moderation decisions. Referred to by some as Facebook’s “Supreme Court,” the Oversight Board was intended to “help Facebook answer some of the most difficult questions around freedom of expression online.” The board is comprised of 20 members from around the world, each paid a six-figure salary for 15 hours of work per week.<ref>https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/inside-the-making-of-facebooks-supreme-court</ref> | * Facebook’s Oversight Board has been called out as a “toothless” PR stunt that the company used to “[co-opt] advocates and academics who would otherwise be more critical of the company.” In 2020, Facebook executives announced a new Oversight Board, which would be tasked with issuing recommendations on controversial content moderation decisions.<ref>https://oversightboard.com/news/327923075055291-announcing-the-first-members-of-the-oversight-board/</ref> Referred to by some as Facebook’s “Supreme Court,” the Oversight Board was intended to “help Facebook answer some of the most difficult questions around freedom of expression online.” The board is comprised of 20 members from around the world, each paid a six-figure salary for 15 hours of work per week.<ref>https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/inside-the-making-of-facebooks-supreme-court</ref> | ||
* From the board’s inception, critics suggested it was a PR stunt with no real sway, which would only give Facebook cover during controversies. Jameel Jaffer, the director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, said he “was worried ... that Facebook will use membership on the board as a way of co-opting advocates and academics who would otherwise be more critical of the company.” Other critics called the board “toothless,” noting that it could not make significant changes without Facebook’s approval. | * From the board’s inception, critics suggested it was a PR stunt with no real sway, which would only give Facebook cover during controversies. Jameel Jaffer, the director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, said he “was worried ... that Facebook will use membership on the board as a way of co-opting advocates and academics who would otherwise be more critical of the company.” Other critics called the board “toothless,” noting that it could not make significant changes without Facebook’s approval. | ||
Latest revision as of 16:54, 11 March 2022
- Facebook’s Oversight Board has been called out as a “toothless” PR stunt that the company used to “[co-opt] advocates and academics who would otherwise be more critical of the company.” In 2020, Facebook executives announced a new Oversight Board, which would be tasked with issuing recommendations on controversial content moderation decisions.[1] Referred to by some as Facebook’s “Supreme Court,” the Oversight Board was intended to “help Facebook answer some of the most difficult questions around freedom of expression online.” The board is comprised of 20 members from around the world, each paid a six-figure salary for 15 hours of work per week.[2]
- From the board’s inception, critics suggested it was a PR stunt with no real sway, which would only give Facebook cover during controversies. Jameel Jaffer, the director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, said he “was worried ... that Facebook will use membership on the board as a way of co-opting advocates and academics who would otherwise be more critical of the company.” Other critics called the board “toothless,” noting that it could not make significant changes without Facebook’s approval.
