Social media: Complaints center launched for disputes over freedom of expression
EU citizens can now challenge decisions on what they are allowed to see and post on three of the largest social media platforms via a new body.
(Image: fizkes / Shutterstock.com)
Operators of large social networks often cause displeasure among those affected with their decisions on what still falls under freedom of expression or the terms of use on their platforms. For a few days now, users in the 27 EU member states have been able to appeal against the removal or keeping online of content on Facebook, TikTok and YouTube to an appeals center based in Dublin. The Appeals Center Europe (ACE), which claims to be independent, will initially accept submissions in German, English, French, Spanish, Italian and Dutch. However, it intends to gradually extend the procedure to other languages and platforms.
If a user or organization in the EU is dissatisfied with a platform's decision on postings, they can contact the new center with their concerns. After a free start-up phase, a fee of 5 euros will be charged. This will be refunded if the case is decided in favor of the applicant. "Every person who submits a justified complaint will receive a result," it says. The institution's work is based on the Digital Services Act (DSA).
In terms of content, the complaints center will deal with issues ranging from bullying and harassment, misinformation and hate speech to manipulated images and videos. Reviewers, who are experts in the platforms' guidelines, will assess whether the decisions made are compatible with the house rules. This is done "also with regard to human rights", the creators emphasized. ACE is certified by Coimisiún na Meán (CNAM), Ireland's designated Digital Services Coordinator, in accordance with Article 21 of the DSA. This is accompanied by the requirement to provide an "impartial, fast and cost-effective service" that is "independent of companies and governments".
ACE boss was Facebook supervisor
The center is to be financed mainly by fees charged to the social media companies for each case (95 euros). If the arbitration board decides in favor of the platform, the fee to be paid by the user remains in place. The operator would then have to pay 90 euros.
ACE's managing director is the British human rights expert and former director of the civil rights organization Article 19, Thomas Hughes. He has headed Meta's newly established Oversight Board since 2020. This is a body tasked with making landmark decisions on content moderation on Facebook and Instagram as an act of self-regulation.
Empfohlener redaktioneller Inhalt
Mit Ihrer Zustimmmung wird hier eine externe Umfrage (Opinary GmbH) geladen.
Ich bin damit einverstanden, dass mir externe Inhalte angezeigt werden. Damit können personenbezogene Daten an Drittplattformen (Opinary GmbH) übermittelt werden. Mehr dazu in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.
"New EU laws give social media users new powers," explained Hughes with regard to the DSA. The mediation body wants to make use of this. "Platforms often have the right rules," says the expert. "But the sheer number of posts means that they don't always apply them correctly." And when platforms make mistakes, users pay the price: "Reports by journalists are deleted simply because they name terrorist groups." The same fate befalls posts that show symptoms of breast cancer, although there are actually exceptions for this. In other cases, policy-violating hate remains online "because people are tricking the system".
Start-up funding from the Facebook Oversight Board
ACE did not answer questions from heise online about who is behind the mediation body and what its business model actually looks like. A CNAM spokesperson explained that the media regulator had " certified the institution as an out-of-court dispute resolution body after a thorough and well-founded examination of its application". They are convinced "that the processes and procedures in place and the remedies implemented by Appeals Center Europe are sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the independence condition".
However, the CNAM representative also admitted that the funding for the initial establishment of the Appeals Center "was provided by a one-off grant from the Oversight Board Trust". This has a bit of a ring to it, as ACE boss Hughes apparently benefited from his position at the Facebook watchdog. According to the spokesperson, however, the Irish regulator assumes that ACE "will be financially independent". It will be funded by fees "charged to social media companies as part of the appeal process". The remuneration of those responsible for resolving disputes is not linked to the outcome of the disputes. CNAM will monitor compliance with the certification requirements and intervene if necessary.
Read also
Meta kicks Russian state media off Facebook, Instagram, Threads and WhatsApp
Incendiary letter to Musk: Breton accused of "disregarding freedom of speech"
Easily recognizable violation of personal rights? Then YouTube must delete
Section 230: AI triggers new dispute over US freedom of speech standard
TikTok fights against possible US ban: ‘We're not going anywhere!’
According to the DSA, the decisions of out-of-court dispute resolution bodies such as the Complaints Center are not binding. However, the platforms must engage in initiated proceedings "in good faith". Hughes is counting on the ACE decisions helping to uncover fundamental problems in the moderation of content by social networks over time. In Germany, on the basis of the Network Enforcement Act (NetzDG), which was overtaken by the DSA, it was possible for social media operators to submit difficult-to-assess cases that were not obviously illegal to the Voluntary Self-Regulation of Multimedia Service Providers (FSM) for an expert review.
(fds)