Today was the 30-day deadline for Facebook’s responses to the policy recommendations in the FOB’s decision on the suspension of Trump’s account. The responses are underwhelming.
Evelyn Douek is a Lecturer on Law and S.J.D. candidate at Harvard Law School, and Affiliate at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society. She studies online speech regulation and platform governance. Before coming to Harvard to complete a Master of Laws, Evelyn clerked for the Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia, the Hon. Justice Susan Kiefel, and worked as a corporate litigator. She received her LL.B. from UNSW Sydney, where she was Executive Editor of the UNSW Law Journal.
Subscribe to this Lawfare contributor via RSS.
What do the details of today's decision reveal about Facebook’s rules, and the FOB’s role in reviewing them?
The Oversight Board Moment You Should’ve Been Waiting For: Facebook Responds to the First Set of Decisions
Facebook said it committed to action as a result of nearly two-thirds of the FOB’s recommendations. This is too rosy a picture, but the responses do show promise and the value of a more open dialogue about content moderation.
In its first five decisions, four of which overturn Facebook content moderation decisions, the board set an ambitious agenda for itself and Facebook.
Announcing Lawfare’s Facebook Oversight Board blog.
Don’t expect high drama or fireworks. But this could signal a substantial change in how the platform approaches content moderation.
Checks and balances don’t exist only for decisions people agree with. Facebook should allow oversight of its most high-profile content moderation decision yet.