Facebook’s oversight board would like to oversee all social media platforms
No time right now?
Facebook has only just launched its Oversight Board, an independent control body for content, and its members are already looking into the distance. One can imagine controlling other platforms as well.
In disputed cases, Facebook’s Oversight Board, or supervisory board, should make a binding decision on which content (and users) may and may not remain on the Facebook Group’s platforms. The body should watch over the right of freedom of expression in a particularly sensitive manner. His decisions should be well founded and made transparent. Facebook has its own web platform created for the oversight board. Here, those affected can also raise objections to moderation decisions.
Contents
Facebook installs its own supervisory body to oversee itself
Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg has appointed twenty people of impeccable reputation from various countries around the world to the supervisory body. They should now decide in groups of five on critical cases, such as the blocking of the account of ex-US President Donald Trump. Among the prominent board members are the former Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt, the Yemeni Nobel Peace Prize winner Tawakkol Karman and the US lawyer Michael McConnell, a former judge.
The supervisory body is supported solely by Facebook, but should be able to make its decisions like a free court. Facebook wants to feel bound by the decisions. Formally and legally, the body has no powers. Facebook can restructure, dissolve or otherwise influence the oversight board at any time.
It is therefore questionable how independently the committee will actually make decisions – under the impression that unpopular decisions in the company could possibly lead to a change in attitude towards the committee.
The committee can imagine a broader range of tasks
So it is no wonder that the vice chairman of the oversight board, Helle Thorning-Schmidt, has a vital interest in expanding the board’s influence. The idea: other platforms could also use the committee to ensure a network-wide uniform assessment of sensitive topics and how they are dealt with. That reports Techcrunch.
Thorning-Schmidt and her colleagues would not be so dependent on the mood in the Facebook group. Facebook in turn would have other platforms that could contribute to the cost of at least 130 million US dollars. And even the users would benefit from it.
Because supervision can only act freely where it is supported by a broad base. Ultimately, the strong dependence on Facebook is the biggest criticism of the oversight board at this point in time.
