Facebook Oversight Board upholds Trump suspension but orders company to review

CBS News – The Facebook Oversight Board on Wednesday upheld the suspension of former President Donald Trump’s account, four months after Facebook suspended him following the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

But the board said it was “not appropriate for Facebook to impose the indeterminate and standardless penalty of indefinite suspension.” The board said that Facebook’s “normal” policies include “removing the violating content, imposing a time-bound period of suspension, or permanently disabling the page and account.”Facebook now must review the matter within six months, opening the door for a possible return. The board also ruled that Facebook must come up with “clear, necessary, and proportionate policies that promote public safety and respect freedom of expression.”

In response, Facebook said it was “pleased” with the decision, saying in a statement that they believe the January decision was “necessary and right.”

“We will now consider the board’s decision and determine an action that is clear and proportionate. In the meantime, Mr. Trump’s accounts remain suspended,” Facebook said in a statement.

Following its own rules

Former Prime Minister of Denmark Helle Thorning-Schmidt, who is a member of the Oversight Board, said in a press conference that the decision was less a referendum on Mr. Trump than a decision on “Facebook and its users.”

“We can’t be left up to Facebook to just choose their own penalty for users — they have to follow their own rules,” Thorning-Schmidt said. “If users have to follow the community standards and values of Facebook and Instagram, Facebook has to do the same. So we’re basically saying that all users are equal and that Facebook also has obligation towards the community standards, and that is to follow their own rules.”

Michael McConnell, the co-chair of the board, said Facebook could not “keep a user off the platform for an undefined period, with no criteria for when or whether the account will be restored.”

“In the event of a violation, a user’s post may be removed or restricted with no future limitation with a limitation for a specific time bound period, or even in severe cases, permanently,” McConnell said. “But users and their audiences must not be left in a state of uncertainty as to time or reasons for restoration.”

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg established the oversight board in 2019. The 20-member body, which includes lawyers, professors, journalists, and human rights activists worldwide, is sometimes referred to as “Facebook’s Supreme Court” because it can overturn decisions made by company executives and its decisions are final.

However, Facebook critics have also panned the board as being too close to the company it’s supposed to regulate.

Roger McNamee, a Facebook investor turned critic, said on Wednesday that the oversight board has “failed.”

“Donald Trump has used Facebook to spread disinformation and incite hate and violence for years,” McNamee said in a statement. “Even when he posted ‘When the looting starts, the shooting starts,’ Facebook failed to act. He violated their terms of service again and again and again, facing no consequences. And yet, Facebook’s Oversight Board still could not summon the courage or common sense to uphold a permanent ban.”

Mr. Trump’s case is  the tenth decision the board has handed down. A five-member panel from the board was assigned to hear the case and produce a final opinion.

A riot at the Capitol

Mr. Trump’s Save America PAC put out a statement Wednesday morning from the former president trashing Congresswoman Liz Cheney and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, but did not mention the Facebook decision.

Mr. Trump was banned from major social media platforms in the wake of the January 6 attack, when a mob of his supporters descended on the Capitol to try to stop the counting of the Electoral College votes. Lawmakers were forced to flee as rioters overtook the building for several hours. Five people died and Mr. Trump was later impeached by the House on a charge of inciting an insurrection.

During the riot, Mr. Trump posted on Twitter and Facebook for his supporters to leave, but also repeated false claims about the election.

“I know your pain, I know you’re hurt,” Mr. Trump said in the video. “We had an election that was stolen from us. It was a landslide election and everyone knows it, especially the other side. But you have to go home now. We have to have peace.” Later in the video, he repeated the false claim that it was a “fraudulent election.”

Facebook took down his video later that day, calling it an “emergency situation.” “We removed it because on balance we believe it contributes to rather than diminishes the risk of ongoing violence,” posted Facebook vice president Guy Rosen.

During the COVID-19 pandemic and in the weeks leading up to and after the election, social media platforms had been flagging Mr. Trump’s posts that contained misleading information. On January 6, Facebook was the first to remove the video entirely.

After it was removed, Mr. Trump took to Twitter, writing: “These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long. Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!”

Twitter removed the post and froze his accounts for 24 hours. The following day, Twitter permanently suspended Mr. Trump’s account, as well as his campaign account.

On January 7, Facebook suspended Mr. Trump’s account until the inauguration, with CEO Mark Zuckerberg posting that the “risks of allowing the President to continue to use our service during this period are simply too great.”

After the inauguration, Facebook turned its final decision on Mr. Trump’s account over to its Oversight Committee.

The committee said in April that it was extending the public comment period before making a decision. According to Reuters, Facebook said it had received over 9,000 comments, more than any other case.

The Facebook Oversight Board on Wednesday upheld the suspension of former President Donald Trump’s account, four months after Facebook suspended him following the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Following its own rules

Former Prime Minister of Denmark Helle Thorning-Schmidt, who is a member of the Oversight Board, said in a press conference that the decision was less a referendum on Mr. Trump than a decision on “Facebook and its users.”

“We can’t be left up to Facebook to just choose their own penalty for users — they have to follow their own rules,” Thorning-Schmidt said. “If users have to follow the community standards and values of Facebook and Instagram, Facebook has to do the same. So we’re basically saying that all users are equal and that Facebook also has obligation towards the community standards, and that is to follow their own rules.”

Michael McConnell, the co-chair of the board, said Facebook could not “keep a user off the platform for an undefined period, with no criteria for when or whether the account will be restored.”

“In the event of a violation, a user’s post may be removed or restricted with no future limitation with a limitation for a specific time bound period, or even in severe cases, permanently,” McConnell said. “But users and their audiences must not be left in a state of uncertainty as to time or reasons for restoration.”

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg established the oversight board in 2019. The 20-member body, which includes lawyers, professors, journalists, and human rights activists worldwide, is sometimes referred to as “Facebook’s Supreme Court” because it can overturn decisions made by company executives and its decisions are final.

Roger McNamee, a Facebook investor turned critic, said on Wednesday that the oversight board has “failed.”

“Donald Trump has used Facebook to spread disinformation and incite hate and violence for years,” McNamee said in a statement. “Even when he posted ‘When the looting starts, the shooting starts,’ Facebook failed to act. He violated their terms of service again and again and again, facing no consequences. And yet, Facebook’s Oversight Board still could not summon the courage or common sense to uphold a permanent ban.”

Mr. Trump’s case is  the tenth decision the board has handed down. A five-member panel from the board was assigned to hear the case and produce a final opinion.

A riot at the Capitol

Mr. Trump’s Save America PAC put out a statement Wednesday morning from the former president trashing Congresswoman Liz Cheney and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, but did not mention the Facebook decision.

Mr. Trump was banned from major social media platforms in the wake of the January 6 attack, when a mob of his supporters descended on the Capitol to try to stop the counting of the Electoral College votes. Lawmakers were forced to flee as rioters overtook the building for several hours. Five people died and Mr. Trump was later impeached by the House on a charge of inciting an insurrection.

During the riot, Mr. Trump posted on Twitter and Facebook for his supporters to leave, but also repeated false claims about the election.

“I know your pain, I know you’re hurt,” Mr. Trump said in the video. “We had an election that was stolen from us. It was a landslide election and everyone knows it, especially the other side. But you have to go home now. We have to have peace.” Later in the video, he repeated the false claim that it was a “fraudulent election.”

Facebook took down his video later that day, calling it an “emergency situation.” “We removed it because on balance we believe it contributes to rather than diminishes the risk of ongoing violence,” posted Facebook vice president Guy Rosen.

During the COVID-19 pandemic and in the weeks leading up to and after the election, social media platforms had been flagging Mr. Trump’s posts that contained misleading information. On January 6, Facebook was the first to remove the video entirely.

After it was removed, Mr. Trump took to Twitter, writing: “These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long. Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!”

Twitter removed the post and froze his accounts for 24 hours. The following day, Twitter permanently suspended Mr. Trump’s account, as well as his campaign account.

On January 7, Facebook suspended Mr. Trump’s account until the inauguration, with CEO Mark Zuckerberg posting that the “risks of allowing the President to continue to use our service during this period are simply too great.”

After the inauguration, Facebook turned its final decision on Mr. Trump’s account over to its Oversight Committee.

The committee said in April that it was extending the public comment period before making a decision. According to Reuters, Facebook said it had received over 9,000 comments, more than any other case.

In its previous decisions the Oversight Board has tended to rule in favor of “free expression.” The board has sided against the company on several high-profile cases, including a ruling to overturn Facebook’s removal of a post about the treatment of Uyghur Muslims in China. The Oversight Board has also overturned decisions to remove posts relating to nudity, COVID-19 misinformation and hate speech, while upholding a decision to remove a post that contained an ethnic slur.

“Outsourcing responsibility”

Facebook’s reliance on the board to decide a small number of challenging cases has come under fire from critics who say the company needs to be doing more to reduce the spread of dangerous misinformation and disinformation on the world’s largest social network.

“It’s just outsourcing responsibility for the problems which are on its platform,” Carole Cadwalladr, an author and investigative journalist who first exposed the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data privacy scandal in 2018, told CBSN on Tuesday. “It’s kind of whitewashing these decisions through this body of experts,” she said, and “deflecting attention from what are the real harms of Facebook, which is not content moderation. The real harms are really its business model, these algorithms which we know amplify polarizing and hate content and lead to some of the impacts that we’ve seen.”

Twitter has not allowed Mr. Trump back, and issued a ruling in April that it will not be archiving his tweets. But while Mr. Trump’s personal page will not be archived, Twitter has kept a record of several institutional government accounts, including those that belong to former White House press secretaries Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Kayleigh McEnany.

The @POTUS45 account, which was the official government page for the president, and the official @WhiteHouse45 account are both archived on Twitter.

Twitter CFO Ned Segal said in an interview with Yahoo Finance that there are “no changes” in their thinking on Mr. Trump’s account.

“When you step back and think about our policies, we want to work hard to be consistent, to be transparent so people know exactly what to expect from us,” Segal said. “We don’t have an oversight board like that [like Facebook]. Our team is accountable for the decisions that we make. There is no changes to anything we have talked about in the past.”

Without a direct line to the millions of followers he used to reach on Twitter and Facebook, Mr. Trump has begun posting statements, sometimes several times per day, on a page of the Save America PAC website.

 

About Author

Connect with Me:

16 Comments

  • FLOWERS52604

    I completely understand why they are being so cautious when it comes to giving a person with influence power online. The internet can be very messy and mixed messages can come across to a younger audience. They should be doing a check on Trump to make sure that the things he is going to say on his account will be more appropriate.

    • 8:12 pm - May 5, 2021

  • Funky Boots

    I think it might be prescient to adopt a “three strikes” policy or something similar; if and when Trump is allowed to return, it is on a probationary basis and his actions are carefully monitored to determine if a continuing ban is justified. This would satiate those making the “free speech” argument while also leaving room for Facebook to enforce consequences on his words and actions.

    • 8:26 pm - May 5, 2021

    • irides

      I’m sure that they already have a similar system in place like many other social media companies do, but Trump already reached those strikes and so his account was removed. I don’t think he should ever be allowed to come back considering what he did was treason.

      • 8:37 am - May 6, 2021

      • aidan.cooley

        You guys are definitely correct in my opinion. But my question is if it’s the job of a media company to enforce Trump’s treasonous acts, or is it the government. Should Facebook be held accountable for acting or not acting on treason, independent of the government.

        • 9:22 am - May 7, 2021

  • Bingus

    i understand why they banned Mr.Trump however i think that it was a premature decision and was banned before getting a warning, i think that there should have been a strike or some sort of warning before the ban. i see how instigating a attack on the capital building looks bad but in not a direct violation of the TOS(terms of service).

    • 8:13 am - May 6, 2021

  • zebrafan1010101

    I understand and agree with the decisions that Facebook has implemented. They had to act in a very cautious manner when the January 6th attacks arose. I don’t see why there should be much discussion of changing the decision. I also see it being funny that Trump has now gone to another website to voice his opinions.

    • 9:16 am - May 6, 2021

  • OhHey

    Facebook and other social media sights are really in a tough place with this one. I think that no matter what they do they are going to get flack for their decision, and despite my own personal opinion on Trump, they are striving for equity within their policies.

    • 10:10 am - May 6, 2021

  • Fajada_Sunrise

    I don’t think there were any premature decisions on Facebook’s part. If someone used a social media platform to organize a cultist following that led to an incident of extreme, unbiased violence no one was going to cry wolf when that platform banned that account. So when Trump incited violence at the capitol, Twitter was in its rights in its ToS to temporarily ban him. I think that Facebook (and other social media platforms) do need to be careful in deciding whether or not to permanently ban Trump, and to follow their own rules despite the end decision.

    • 2:03 pm - May 6, 2021

  • i.am.a.brick.

    I understand why Facebook and other social media forms are taking precautions with these types of situations, and they are valid for doing so because of the influence different messages can have on different audiences. Of course, these media platforms will get backlash for their decisions and regulations due to political opinions, but I think this should apply for all users, including those with great power. Some users out there don’t face these consequences because they don’t have as much power, recognition, or influence (like said political figure), so hopefully, these decisions that Facebook has made will contribute to more than just those who have great recognition.

    • 4:22 pm - May 6, 2021

  • Cheese

    The social media platforms are between a rock and a hard place. They have to let people have free speech and limit the post to be appropriate. I’m glad they set up a “Facebook Supreme Court” because I think it has the potential to give a bipartisan opinion on bans. I hope that Facebook applies its standards to all its users and creators.

    • 8:05 am - May 7, 2021

  • Mikasa

    Its hard when you have such a famous social media figure who was just our president, that is being irresponsible on the internet. To be frank I have no idea what I would do if I had to make this decision. It’s good that they have his account suspended at the moment but as far as what to do next, its hard. Possibly do what you would do with any other person causing these issues. but I mean, Trump supporters raided the capitol and killed people, maybe he should be taken off permanently or suspended for at least a year. Trump needs a social media break.

    • 9:21 am - May 7, 2021

  • Mikasa

    Its hard when you have such a famous social media figure who was just our president, that is being irresponsible on the internet. To be frank I have no idea what I would do if I had to make this decision. It’s good that they have his account suspended at the moment but as far as what to do next, its hard. Possibly do what you would do with any other person causing these issues. but I mean, Trump supporters raided the capitol and killed people, maybe he should be taken off permanently or suspended for at least a year.

    • 9:22 am - May 7, 2021

  • rain

    I think that is ban is valid because of the amount of obstruction Trump has caused in the election and overall democratic process. But the issue with this decision is precedence, really expanding the power of individual companies to limit our freedom of speech. This upheld decision could ultimately lead to limited freedom of speech in multiple scenarios, so it can be argued that despite how much Trump has disrupted democracy this decision could disrupt it even more.

    • 9:38 am - May 7, 2021

  • Bunny03

    I hope that the Facebook supreme court’s decision is unbiased and warranted because is the foundation of this countries to be fair and just. I do think that Trump’s post was aggressive and that he has had previous strikes for misconduct on the platform, so I believe that the Facebook court’s decision was justified.

    • 10:12 am - May 7, 2021

  • RMS

    I do understand the fact of how complicated social media actually is. I mean, Facebook had every right to ban Trump because he was no following the rules, however, this can lead to discrimination against Facebook because some believe that it is an act against freedom of speech. And also, since Trump has more power than regular people, his breaking the rules makes Facebook need to really consider what action they will take next.

    • 10:14 am - May 7, 2021

  • ChiliChimichanga

    I do appreciate Thorning-Schmidt’s principle of “following your own rules”. However, due to the subjective nature of the words ‘inflammatory’ and ‘violating’, it seems completely in the platform’s power to actively prevent what they thought would cause further hate and violence. Everybody needs to follow the rules, but when someone breaks the rules, it makes sense that whoever’s in charge can act on their established and consented protocols to punish or prevent harm.

    • 10:44 am - May 7, 2021