Latest in Content Moderation
Is the EU’s new Digital Services Act the path forward for platform governance legislation in other parts of the world?
Nor am I “panicked over free speech breaking out” on Elon Musk’s Twitter, or part of “a strong movement on the left to regulate and censor the Internet.”
Facebook’s Oversight Board presents itself as an executor of the global public interest embedded in international law. But in reality, the board uses international law in an imaginative and incoherent fashion, often widely reinterpreting its principles and instruments.
The new EU social media law opens the door to renewed conflict with the United States over freedom of expression. Ensuring national legislation meets human rights standards will mitigate these risks.
Content moderation decisions are made throughout the internet stack. Our research suggests that almost none of the larger tech companies is transparently reporting what they are moderating and why.
The Supreme Court is being asked to decide whether social media companies must explain how they moderate content. To get to an answer, the justices will have to clarify the law surrounding compelled commercial speech.
The report found that proactive detection technologies and Meta's legal obligations contributed, in part, to Meta's asymmetrical treatment of content during the conflict to the detriment of Palestinian
Technology companies are more active than ever in trying to stop terrorists, white supremacists, conspiracy theorists, and other hateful individuals, organizations, and movements from exploiting their platforms, but government and public pressure to do more is growing. This paper presents a range of content moderation options for technology companies, discussing how they work in practice, their advantages, and their limits and risks.
The Fifth Circuit badly overreaches in upholding Texas’s social media moderation law, making a hash of the First Amendment in the process.
Nobody knows how often or why some content decisions occur.