The list includes more than 4,000 groups, individuals held under the designations “terror,” “hate,” “crime,” “militarized social movement” or “violent non-state actor.”
Facebook’s blacklist of dangerous individuals and organizations has been leaked to the public.
a reproducible snapshot, published by The Intercept On Tuesday, the social media giant displayed 100 pages of more than 4,000 groups and individuals classified under the designations “terror,” “hate,” “crime,” “militarized social movement” or “violent non-state actor” does.
In addition, The Intercept published a reproduced snapshot of Facebook Appreciation, Support and Representation Moderation Guidelines, which helps the social media platform’s content moderators determine which posts to delete and which to punish.
Killed journalist’s father took violent video on Facebook
Facebook’s Community Standards Divide dangerous organizations and individuals into one of three levels:
- level 1Entities that cause serious offline harm – including organizing or advocating violence against civilians, repeatedly dehumanizing or advocating harm based on protected characteristics, or engaging in systematic criminal actions . Under this level, content that praises, originally supports, or represents hate-promoting ideologies such as Nazism and white supremacy is removed.
- tier 2: Entities that engage in violence against state or military actors, but generally do not target civilians. Under this level, Facebook removes all genuine support and representation of the entities on the DOI list, their leaders and their key members, and any appreciation of the violent activities of the groups.
- tier 3Entities that may engage repeatedly in violation of Facebook’s hate speech or dangerous organizations policies on or off the Platform, or may demonstrate a strong intent to engage in offline violence in the near future, but not necessarily that they engage in violence to date or advocate violence against others on the basis of their protected characteristics. Under this level, users may share content that includes references to designated dangerous organizations and individuals, to report on, condemn or objectively discuss their or their activities, but clearly indicating their intent needed.
Whistleblower Frances Hogan, Facebook watchdog board to meet in ‘coming weeks’
In a lengthy Twitter thread, Facebook’s policy director for terrorism and dangerous organizations, Brian Fishman, confirmed that a version of the DOI list had been leaked, but emphasized that it is “not comprehensive.” He said it is “extremely difficult” to define and identify dangerous organizations, noting that “there is no hard-and-fast definition for everyone.”
He also explained that terrorist organizations such as the Islamic State and al Qaeda have hundreds of individual entities, many of which are listed separately on the DOI list to “facilitate enforcement”, which skews the total number of entities from a particular Can do. Area. As a result, Fishman argues intercept claim That the DOI list is biased towards marginalized and vulnerable populations is “misleading” and “wrong.”
In a statement to Granthshala Business, Fishman told Granthshala Business that Facebook has a team of more than 350 experts focused on removing dangerous organizations from its platform and looking for emerging threats.
“While we ban thousands of organizations, including more than 250 white supremacist groups, under these rules, we also update this list as new ones emerge,” he said. “It’s a hostile space, so we try to be as transparent as possible, while also prioritizing safety, limiting legal risks and preventing opportunities for groups to get around our rules.”
Although Fishman doesn’t condone The Intercept’s leak, he noted in his Twitter thread that Facebook will use it as an opportunity to get better.
“That means tough questions internally and more focused discussions with stakeholders, who often have valuable perspectives,” Fishman said. “In the process, we’re going to learn about gaps in designation and enforcement, and about places where the policy could be, and maybe there should be more specifics. That’s positive and we’re going to be on FB as a platform and support.” Will use any learning to make a more productive community online and off.”
since February, Facebook’s inspection board The U.S. has made several recommendations regarding the DOI list, including making it available to the public. Established in 2020, the Oversight Board is a separate entity that can reportedly enforce binding rules governing Facebook’s business practices.
Get Granthshala Business on the go by clicking here
In addition to The Intercept, the Wall Street Journal has leaked a collection of documents, now dubbed Facebook Files, which it received from former Facebook product manager turned whistleblower Frances Haugen.
In testimony before the Senate Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Product Security and Data Security last week, Haugen said Facebook executives chose to prioritize profits over the safety of their users and that leaked documents show how Facebook “has managed to protect its users”. Its own research repeatedly misled the public about “reveals about the safety of children, the efficacy of its artificial intelligence system, and its role in spreading divisive and extreme messages.”
“I came forward because I believe that every human being deserves the dignity of truth,” she said. “As long as Facebook is operating in the shadows, hiding its research from public scrutiny, it is not accountable. Unless incentives change, Facebook will not change. Left alone, Facebook continues to make choices that go against the common good. Will keep.”
Facebook executives, including CEO Mark Zuckerberg, have accused Hogen of mishandling their efforts to protect public safety.
Haugen confirmed Monday that he has accepted an invitation from the Oversight Board to discuss what he learned while working at Facebook.
“Facebook has repeatedly lied to the board and I look forward to sharing the truth with them,” Haugen wrote on Twitter.
The Oversight Board confirmed that the meeting would take place “in the coming weeks” and said it “appreciates”[s] A chance to discuss Ms. Haugen’s experiences and gather information that can help us advance greater transparency and accountability from Facebook through our case decisions and recommendations.”