Two weeks before the US presidential election, the Oversight Board says it has “serious concerns” about Meta’s content moderation systems in “election contexts”, and that the company risks “excessive removal of political speech” if it over-enforces its rules. The board issued the warning while considering a case involving a satirical image of Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz.
Meta originally removed the post, shared on Facebook in August, which showed an edited version of a movie poster for Dumb and Dumber. The original 1994 movie poster shows the two main characters grabbing each other’s nipples from above their shirts. In the altered version, the actors’ faces were replaced by Harris and Walz.
According to the Oversight Board, Meta cited its bullying and harassment rules, which include a provision prohibiting “offensive sexual photoshops or images”. The social network later restored the post after the matter drew the Oversight Board’s attention, and the company acknowledged that the satirical image did not violate its rules because it did not depict sexual activity.
Despite Meta’s retort, the board says the case suggests larger issues in the way Meta handles posts involving election-related content. “This post is nothing more than a generic satirical image of prominent politicians and is immediately recognizable as such,” the board wrote. ”
Nevertheless, the company’s failure to recognize the nature of this post and treat it accordingly raises serious concerns about the systems and resources Meta has in place to effectively make content determinations in such election contexts.”
In response to the Oversight Board’s consideration of the situation, a Meta spokesperson provided the following brief statement: “We mistakenly removed this post but restored it after the issue was brought to our attention.”
It’s an unusually direct criticism from the Oversight Board, which issued its analysis of the case in a summary judgment that comes without the group’s usual list of recommendations for the social media company. The board has also previously pressured Meta to clarify its rules about satirical content.
The latest case highlights another issue that many of the company’s users have also complained about: over-enforcing its rules. “In this case, however, the Board highlights an over-enforcement of Meta’s bullying and harassment policy with respect to satire and political speech, such as non-sexually derogatory portrayals of political figures,” the board wrote.
“It also points to the dangers that over-enforcement of the bullying and harassment policy can pose, particularly in the context of an election, as it can lead to excessive removal of political speech and reduce the ability to criticize government officials and political candidates, including in a satirical manner.”