MOU with Facebook. Good…but why?
The agreement signed last week by the Polish Ministry of Digital Affairs and Facebook is unique and both parties are to be congratulated. One can also hope that this is just the beginning and the effect of the agreement will be the introduction, at least partially, of the independent mechanisms of control of the internet giant. What disappoints and slightly spoils the effect of excitement about the agreement is a non-transparent process of reaching it, and thus the uncertainty whether the adopted model responds to the most pressing problems.
The agreement assumes an additional path of “appeal” to Facebook in case of blocking content on the basis of the so-called community standards. Facebook has recently introduced a mechanism to appeal against blockade, but apparently the Ministry and the platform itself have found this path to be ineffective and the focus has now been on creating the next instance in appeal proceedings. Although it is difficult to talk about such instance as a control performed independent body. It is rather a model known from the administrative proceedings as the re-examination of the case, because the instance of appeal is Facebook itself. Again.
Is this an optimal solution?
The application in the mode specified in the agreement via the contact point created by the Ministry and other public institution, can be submitted if Facebook has not responded to the blocking appeal or has upheld the blocking decision. In the information about the agreement, I did not found enough information if this really is a first-rate problem in dealing with the platform and whether there were other challenges detected as well. It is known that part of the so-called right-wing circles complained about blocking content posted on Facebook, and certainly the operation of the platform’s employees was in many cases too hasty. We do not know, however, whether the internal appeal system has also failed. Was it really unjust to keep the decision on blocking? It is also not known to what extent the systemic problem is the lack of response to the appeal submitted in mode established earlier by Facebook.
Without answering these questions, it is also difficult to determine whether the mechanism adopted in the agreement is an effective remedy for possible shortcomings of the existing solutions. In other words, we lack the results of the diagnosis to assess whether therapy is needed, and if so, whether it was well planned. An external observer may have doubts about this, because if the internal appeal mechanism is considered ineffective, why was it decided again to rule to “unblock” the content of employees by the very same Facebook? The Ministry together with other public institution only provide the platform to submit an application to re-examine the case, but they do not have any mechanisms to influence its resolution.
A good step but what’s on the horizon?
A positive idea set out in the agreement is Facebook’s commitment to provide the user with a “reasoned” response. However, the possible elements of this justification have not been disclosed, hence it is difficult to assess to what extent it is exhaustive. More information on the phenomenon of possible problems could also be revealed on the basis on the data processed by the contact point: the number of applications and the ways of dealing with them. Unfortunately, the agreement does not indicate whether such data will be available to the public.
I am aware that the deal Facebook has made with the Polish authorities is a breakthrough in the platform’s relations with the governments. I appreciate the willingness of both parties to make life easier for Facebook users and positively assess their intentions. The rather modest provisions of the agreement are probably due to the fact that this is just the first step and the time will come to satisfy the bigger appetites. My biggest objections are connected with the fact that the process of reaching an agreement was not more open to the opinions of the users themselves (or simply no such information was provided) and we still do not know enough about their needs. What is more, from the information disclosed so far, we will not find out how much the system of handling requests will cost and who will pay for it, although it can be concluded that it will be on the Polish side which is responsible for implementing the system. This is important information, because it concerns whether all taxpayers pay for it, or only Facebook users. And this in turn will show who bears the costs of regulating the platforms.
Please find below the original text of the MOU.
Memorandum of Understanding
Content management over the internet is a fundamental topic in today’s digital area. It is also a multilayer and complex topic that demands reflection and cooperation between all the parties active on the internet, such as service providers, public administration, citizens, etc.
Free expression is key to a thriving society and giving everyone a voice is a positive force in the world, which increases the diversity of ideas shared in public discourse. However, service providers also need to ensure the safety of their users. Striking the right balance between these values continues to be a difficult and constantly evolving challenge.
One should be looking for positive and constructive building blocks that will contribute in shaping this discussion into one common ground. It is in this spirit and with the shared goal to address this challenge, that Ministry of Digital Affairs, NASK — Research and Academic Computer Network and Facebook have created the “contact point” and agreed on the following.
The Ministry of Digital Affairs, NASK and Facebook, directed by the will to make sure people have access to platforms where they feel safe to share and discuss issues, which are important to them, while being protected from hate speech, violence, bullying and harassment, agree to cooperate in the search of solutions for the multilayered problem of content on the Internet. To that end they have taken joint actions to establish a point of contact designed to submit notifications by Facebook users, whose content, accounts or profiles were removed, with the aim for Facebook to perform an additional review based on its community standards. The Ministry of Digital Affairs as a public entity playing a leading role in the development of the information society and electronic services have initiated this cooperation and will engage in promoting and communicating the contact point”, whereas NASK as a project implementer will set up and operate the contact point’s IT system.
The “contact point” can be used if the content, profiles or page that have been removed cover one of the categories listed in the form developed by the Ministry of Digital Affairs and the user appealed to Facebook against the decision on removing, and Facebook has considered the appeal negatively or failed to respond to it within 72 hours. Facebook allows its users to write an appeal when they think a mistake has been made. Such appeals cover individual pieces of content for nudity and sexual activity, hate speech and violence.
The decision to restore the content, profiles or page shall be made by Facebook in an autonomous manner, based on the Community Standards. Facebook declares to re-examine whether the content, accounts or profiles removed violate the Community Standards, and to unblock the content, account or profile, which as a result of the re-examination has been found compliant with the Community Standards. For every request received by mean of this communication channel, Facebook will do its utmost to provide a reasoned feedback to the contact point within 72 hours from the reception of the request from the contact point.
The contact point will be launched in the weeks to come and further information as to how to access the appeal form will be communicated soon.
As the work towards making the internet a safe place supporting free expression is a wide-reaching effort, the Ministry of Digital Affairs, NASK and Facebook declare the contact point initiative open to other platforms, companies and institutions who share this goal.
