Can Facebook Remove Anything it Wants?
Recently, the social media platform drew flak for taking down the page of Kisan Ekta Morcha. How can Facebook do this?
The farmers’ protests have reached boiling point. Despite the cold, police attacks, and Kangana Ranaut’s tweets, they’re still actively fighting against the new farm laws. For context, you can read our previous stories on this (here and here).
The latest entrant to this battle is Facebook. Two days ago, the platform deleted the page being operated by the Kisan Ekta Morcha. The farmers were using this page to talk about the controversial farm laws and to draw public support. Created on 14 December 2020, it had amassed over 1,60,000 likes within eight days.
While the page was restored in three hours, Facebook faced criticism for removing it. To make matters worse, this incident fed into the narrative of the company having a nexus with the ruling party.
The Constitution of Facebook
The platform claimed that the Kisan Ekta Morcha page went against its community standards (‘Community Standards’) on spam. These Community Standards regulate various aspects of Facebook usage. For instance, they deal with content that –
(a) incites violence;
(b) promotes bullying or harassment;
(c) violates users’ privacy; and,
(d) promotes hate speech.
The principle here is that such content has no place on Facebook. The last thing anyone wants is to be exposed to inappropriate or hateful content while using the platform. The Community Standards are in everyone’s interest.
The problem is that Facebook plays judge and jury when deciding what to remove.
Supreme Court of Zuck
Let’s say I post an article about corruption in Indian politics. This article explains how I’ve received information from inside sources about members of the Parliament accepting bribes to favour particular organizations.
As a reader, it’s up to you to decide whether you believe my article. You can weigh the logic and the evidence to make an informed opinion. If you think that the article is baseless, you’re also free to make a counterargument.
Some people, however, report my article for promoting fake news. This is a ground for action as per Facebook’s Community Standards. The company reviews my article and decides to stop people from liking or sharing it. While the article continues to exist, no one’s reading it anymore because of the restrictions.
You see the issue?
Facebook is effectively curbing my right to free speech. It’s true that Article 19(2) of the Constitution allows for reasonable restrictions. But this is a decision that courts need to make after carefully considering the contents of my article, evidence provided, and judicial precedents.
Facebook has neither the expertise nor the knowledge needed to censor such content.
Back to the Farmers
In Facebook’s defence, the Kisan Ekta Morcha page was removed because the automated system thought that it was engaging in too much activity. The Community Standards on spam state that users should not post at very high frequencies. This may lead the system to flag a profile or a page for spamming on the platform.
Facebook claims that most of its spam filtering is done by automated systems. The company reinstated the page the moment it realized what has happening.
It’s hard to say whether this is a good thing. I’d personally be more upset if my article was removed even without the courtesy of a human being reading it.
Stay WorldWise!
Feedback from our previous cohorts makes us believe that the Law Firm Boot Camp is truly transforming legal education. Applications for the January cohort are now open.