Meta’s Oversight Board, initially established to handle content moderation decisions for platforms like Facebook, has now taken its jurisdiction to Threads, Instagram’s latest venture.
This move introduces a new dynamic in social media governance, particularly as it contrasts with the lighter, more community-driven moderation seen on platforms such as Twitter/X and decentralized networks like Mastodon and Bluesky.
About First Threads Case
Threads, positioned as a competitor to Twitter/X, faces unique moderation challenges, which are now overseen by the Oversight Board.
Historically, the board has handled high-profile cases, including Facebook’s ban of Donald Trump and the controversy over COVID-19 misinformation. Its role in moderating content such as the removal of breast cancer awareness photos further underscores its impact on shaping platform policies.
The board’s first case from Threads involves a contentious post by a user responding to an article about Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida. The post included a screenshot of the article, a critical caption accusing Kishida of tax evasion, derogatory remarks about his eyewear, and the phrase “drop dead.” These elements, particularly the incitement to death, prompted a Meta human reviewer to flag the post as violating the company’s Violence and Incitement rule. This decision was upheld on appeal, leading the user to turn to the Oversight Board.
How Does Meta’s Moderation Strategy Compare to Others?
Meta’s centralized approach to moderation, characterized by the Oversight Board’s capacity to override decisions up to and including those by CEO Mark Zuckerberg, contrasts sharply with the practices on X, where Elon Musk has emphasized crowd-sourced fact-checking through Community Notes.
Additionally, decentralized platforms like Mastodon and Bluesky allow users more direct control over content moderation, offering a “stackable moderation” feature where community members can tailor their moderation settings.
The Oversight Board’s decision to select this particular case reflects its broader strategy to scrutinize Meta’s policies on political content moderation, especially pertinent during an election year when political discourse is highly sensitive. Meta has declared its intent not to proactively recommend political content on Instagram or Threads, which adds another layer of relevance to the board’s review.
The Board is set to announce more cases soon, focusing on criminal allegations based on nationality. These decisions will not only influence how Threads is perceived in terms of user freedom and expression but will also set precedents that could affect user migration between platforms, potentially benefiting startups that offer novel moderation methodologies.
Related News:
Featured Image courtesy of DADO RUVIC/REUTERS