Facebook set up an Oversight Board to help us resolve its most difficult decisions in review. But even though the body is called the “Facebook Supreme Court,” Facebook executives have said that some of their colleagues could one day benefit from board operations.
Such a move would have the advantages of Facebook, which would say that their attempt at independence was so successful that its competitors decided to join. But in the meantime, competing platforms have little (and seemingly less interesting) motivation in doing so.
Oversight Board and ‘other companies’
In a 2019 letter describing “Facebook’s commitment to the Oversight Board,” Mark Zuckerberg also stated that the committee’s review will one day continue on Facebook alone. “We expect the committee to hear only a few cases at first, but in the long run we expect it to increase in size and possibly include more companies in the market,” he said. .
The comment did not mention interest at the time, but the idea has been revived recently. Speaking of a Economic Times After the board decided to suspend Donald Trump, Facebook Global VP’s NP Clegg VP also raised hopes of overseeing all management companies. “Who knows, in the future it could be a virus that will be used legally or it could be something that could work in more companies than Facebook,” he said. “I want to think [that] in the next five years or so the Oversight Board will be able to work in the same way as many other TV companies that are facing the same challenges as us. ”
When asked about Clegg’s comments, Twitter and YouTube declined to comment. Reddit did not respond to a request for comment.
So far, the Oversight Board charter does not mention companies other than Facebook. And no other media company has publicly expressed any interest in publishing their decision on the trial. But it’s not just Facebook leaders who want to develop board ideas. At least one Board administrator has also expressed an opinion as possible. Speaking at SXSW, public relations officer Rachel Wolbers said the organization does not like the moniker Facebook Governing Body. “This is because we believe we will do a very good job so that other companies can seek our help,” he said.
It is unclear how this might work. The board pays all the bills with Facebook, which is also very involved in making its rules and electing its members. Getting other companies to participate may be a confirmation of Facebook, as it would make the committee look legitimate, and give the company bullets against opponents. It will also help the Oversight Board to appear more independent, as it can be a “Supreme Court” for all media, not just Facebook.
But there are a few obvious advantages to competing platforms, which seem to be reluctant to participate in Facebook’s experiments on autonomy. “I think the major platforms will continue to monitor other companies in the elections, but we are far from YouTube and Twitter promising to follow the Facebook Oversight Board,” said Nu Wexler, a former communications consultant and former Facebook, Google and Twitter spokesman. “They all have different rules and they like to be independent.”
There are a lot of shortcomings, too. Not only does the organization need to study the diversity of ideas for each company, it may need to establish a single platform for each platform, but it will also need to process user requests and feedback from each group. More board members and assistants may be needed as well, too. (The council currently has 20 members planning to grow to 40 just to meet Facebook’s grievances.)
An Oversight Board spokesman said any such ideas are very far in the future. “The Oversight Board was set up to try an internet-based approach that could work for some time, but our focus right now is on Facebook and Instagram,” said Dex Hunter-Torricke. “Being proactive is very difficult on many pages, and the Oversight Board believes that very few decisions should be made by companies alone. I hope that what they have learned from the Board in the next few years can help other companies realize their online solutions.”
However, there are other factors to consider. Companies have been setting up their own regulatory bodies to enforce the rules and regulations. In the gaming industry, the Entertainment Software Rating Board, or ESRB, was formed in the early 90’s and developed the most widely used gaming consoles in the world today. Group “One of the best examples in the world of corporate independence.” Similar types are available in the recording industry, radio video and video.
In the case of social media, companies have previously linked to other issues, such as terrorism. Facebook and Twitter and YouTube have been active for many years through the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terror (GIFCT), which was designed to prevent terrorists from spreading on television. Similarly, media companies have shared in research on electoral fraud, campaign corruption and platform control.
But bringing other platforms to Facebook’s experiments on the Oversight Board could be another matter. First, the availability of the board remains controversial. While others have praised their efforts to force Facebook to follow , there are specific questions about how it affects people. His main critics say it is not just a way for Facebook to avoid participating in its elections and prepare for its own serious consequences.
“I have no doubt that the Oversight Board will go where they can offer their views in a credible way on other platforms,” Jessica Gonzalez, co-CEO of the Free Press Institute and a member of the “Real Facebook Oversight Board,” told Engadget. elections on the whole field. “
For Gonzalez, the story only goes beyond Facebook’s criticism. When the commission listed the “smart people,” he said it did not represent the areas most affected by the media coverage. “There is no other kind of ideology that happens there. We have to have different races, we have to have economics and economics. We also have to hear from the parties how these decisions affect them.”
Another problem critics point out is that the “Oversight Board” created by Facebook does not replace it .
“Facebook and other social media platforms with the same business will find ways to monitor advertising revenue sharing,” New Jersey Congressman Frank Pallone wrote. following the Oversight Board’s opinion on Trump’s suspension. “Every day, Facebook is promoting and promoting propaganda and propaganda, and its structure and regulatory frameworks often seem to ignore these destructive practices. It is clear that the real answer lies only when you can legislate.”
All sales selected by Engadget are selected by our publishing team, independent of our parent company. Some of our articles include helpful links. If you purchase one of these links, we will be able to make a donation.
