| Hey everyone, it's Sarah Frier. It's been about four months since Facebook Inc. suspended former President Donald Trump because of his potential to inspire violence. Whether he gets reinstated is up to the company's Oversight Board, a Facebook-funded yet functionally independent body intended as a check on its power over speech and distribution. The board's decision, after weeks of soliciting public opinion and a written appeal from Trump himself, comes Wednesday morning. Facebook's critics are bracing for the impact of a potential Trump reinstatement. Maybe Trump would have enough of a platform to run for president again! Maybe he would return to the forefront of the news cycle with his incendiary posts! Facebook has been preparing its advertisers for the big decision, which they say they have no influence over, according to the Wall Street Journal. It's increasingly clear that there's a problem with discussing this as a binary choice, between Trump's renewed potential to go viral and a world where a former president is completely unwelcome on Facebook and Instagram forever. There should be a way for Trump's thoughts and those of other Trump-like figures to exist on social media, without all the amplification that many of these platforms provide. In one of my colleague Kurt Wagner's Friday chats on Twitter Spaces, guests Kate Klonick of St. John's University and Evelyn Douek of Harvard's Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society said it's not ideal that the social network relies so heavily on one blunt instrument—the ban—against every offense, whether it's repeat copyright violations or illegal gun sales. Facebook has been experimenting with half-measures, like reducing algorithmic distribution for people who may be spreading vaccine misinformation. But nobody knows when an algorithm has been tweaked. It's not a transparent punishment amid already-confusing content rules. Facebook has also tried labeling anything with the potential to be misleading. That didn't work against Trump. His post-election frustrations were still amplified on the site, helping inspire the Jan. 6 violence at the U.S. Capitol. His new mini blog posts on donaldjtrump.com, with prominent buttons to share to Facebook and Twitter, aren't having quite the same impact. Facebook has said it will follow the board's decision no matter what. But if Trump is allowed back on, and if other world leaders wind up in similar situations, the company can also attempt a middle ground—allowing access to Facebook, but restricting the platform's powers of virality. An account could be left up for people who want to see it, but the posts could be presented without likes, comments or shares. The result would be all of the free speech, with none of the free distribution. This is a moment for Facebook to rethink the enforcement of its content policies. A user's posts are only as influential (and potentially harmful) as the company allows them to be. —Sarah Frier | 
Post a Comment