Facebook oversight board upholds Trump suspension
Donald Trump will remain blocked from Facebook after a ruling from the company’s independent oversight board that has sparked a fierce backlash from Republicans.
The decision will continue to deprive the former president of a vital mouthpiece, but Facebook must review within the next six months whether the freeze should stay in place permanently, the panel decided.
Trump lashed out at big tech in a statement following the decision: “Free Speech has been taken away from the President of the United States because the Radical Left Lunatics are afraid of the truth, but the truth will come out anyway, bigger and stronger than ever before . . . These corrupt social media companies must pay a political price, and must never again be allowed to destroy and decimate our Electoral Process.”
The social media platform suspended Trump’s account indefinitely four months ago over fears he could stir further violence and unrest following the storming of the Capitol by a mob of the 45th president’s supporters on January 6.
Later in January, Facebook asked its oversight board — a Supreme Court-style body first appointed in 2020 that hears appeals from users on its content moderation decisions — to review the ban, as well as provide more general recommendations about how the platform should treat rule-breaking content from world leaders.
On Wednesday, the board said it had upheld the decision to restrict the former president’s account on the basis that “in maintaining an unfounded narrative of electoral fraud and persistent calls to action”, he had created “a clear, immediate risk of harm”. His words of support for the Capitol rioters had also “legitimised their violent actions”, the board said.
However, it said that chief executive Mark Zuckerberg’s decision to ban Trump “indefinitely” was an “indeterminate and standardless penalty”.
Effectively passing the buck back to the company to decide Trump’s ultimate fate, it added: “The Board insists that Facebook review this matter to determine and justify a proportionate response that is consistent with the rules that are applied to other users of its platform. Facebook must complete its review of this matter within six months of the date of this decision.”
It remains unclear whether Trump, once an obsessive user of social media with more than 35m followers on Facebook and 24m on Instagram, will be able to regain access to a powerful channel for energising his supporters and raking in fundraising dollars. The former president has not ruled out running again for the White House in 2024.
The Republican members of the House judiciary committee responded with a tweet that simply said “Pathetic”.
In a blog post, Facebook’s vice-president of global affairs and communications Nick Clegg reiterated that the company believed that the decision to suspend Trump was “necessary and right”.
“We’re pleased the board has recognised that the unprecedented circumstances justified the exceptional measure we took,” Clegg said.
But he added that “the board criticised the open-ended nature of the suspension”. Trump’s accounts will remain suspended while the company reviews its response, he said.
The decision has already proven divisive, with some Republican figures seizing on it to reinvigorate the debate about censorship and Big Tech’s power.
“Facebook is more interested in acting like a Democrat Super PAC than a platform for free speech and open debate. If they can ban President Trump, all conservative voices could be next,” wrote Republican congressman Kevin McCarthy on Twitter. Jim Jordan, a Republican representative from Ohio, said: “Break them up.”
Meanwhile, Democrats and civil rights groups urged Facebook to permanently ban the former president and reiterated calls for tougher regulation.
Frank Pallone, chair of the House energy and commerce committee, said: “Donald Trump has played a big role in helping Facebook spread disinformation, but whether he’s on the platform or not, Facebook and other social media platforms with the same business model will find ways to highlight divisive content to drive advertising revenues.”
“Every day, Facebook is amplifying and promoting disinformation and misinformation, and the structure and rules governing its oversight board generally seem to ignore this disturbing reality,” he added. “It’s clear that real accountability will only come with legislative action.”
The ruling is the biggest test to date of Facebook’s 20-member oversight board, made up of academics, civil rights groups and experts across the political spectrum. The board, which is funded by Facebook but otherwise independent from the company, has been regarded by the company’s critics as an attempt to outsource high-profile content decisions and prove it can self-police as global regulators circle.
The board also made several recommendations that Facebook is obliged to consider but not bound to follow. In particular, it called on the platform to publicly lay out its process for suspending or banning the accounts of influential figures — reflecting wider public anger recently that the company’s content moderation penalties mechanisms are opaque.
It urged the company to create a specific team to handle the moderation of political speech from influential users that “should be insulated from political and economic interference, as well as undue influence”. It comes as the company has faced accusations that it has pandered to both the left and right, and concerns that its right-leaning lobbyists in particular have been involved in moderation decisions.
Facebook rival Twitter banned Trump permanently in January. Google’s YouTube has suspended the former president from the video platform but chief executive Susan Wojcicki said it would lift the freeze once “the risk of violence has decreased”.
Trump has kept a relatively low profile since leaving the White House in late January and snubbed Joe Biden’s inauguration. He has made few public appearances and participated in only a handful of interviews, mostly with Fox News.
He has continued to repeat some of the unproven claims of election fraud that contributed to his bans. He issued several statements on Monday alone through his Save America political action committee, including: “The Fraudulent Presidential Election of 2020 will be, from this day forth, known as THE BIG LIE!” Trump has also touted the possibility that he might create his own social network.
Facebook’s oversight board: who they are and what they do
What is the oversight board?
The Facebook oversight board was created to “review a selected number of highly emblematic” content moderation decisions and determine if those were “made in accordance with Facebook’s stated values and policies”. It is funded by a $130m trust set up by Facebook and launched last year.
Users can appeal to the board against takedowns of content or call for a review of content they think has wrongfully been allowed to remain on the platform. Facebook can also recommend cases — which is what happened in the Trump suspension.
The board can also offer broad policy recommendations to Facebook, although the social media company is not bound to follow them.
Who are they?
The board is made up of 20 academics, human rights and free speech experts and journalists who were selected by Facebook but operate independently. Members include former Guardian newspaper editor Alan Rusbridger, Nobel laureate Tawakkol Karman and former Danish prime minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt.
An anonymous sub-selection of board members are tasked with coming to an initial decision on a case, with which a majority of the board must agree.
What did they decide on Wednesday?
The board upheld the decision to restrict Trump’s account.
It has also been asked to advise how to approach the suspension of world leaders generally, at a time when figures such as Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro and Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte have faced scrutiny for their social media use.
The board’s bylaws allow for a 90-day window to reach a conclusion on a case and an additional week for Facebook to take action. The decision on the Trump case was delayed after the board received about 9,000 responses to its call for comments. Trump had also submitted a “user statement” to the board detailing why he thought the decision should be overturned.