وصف حالة
To read this announcement in Punjabi, click here.
ਇਸ ਘੋਸ਼ਣਾ ਨੂੰ ਪੰਜਾਬੀ ਵਿੱਚ ਪੜ੍ਹਨ ਲ, ਇੱਥੇ ਕਲਿੱਕ ਕਰੋ।ਈ
Note: Please be aware before reading that the following summary includes disturbing material dealing with content about violence against minors.
The Oversight Board will address the two cases below together, choosing either to uphold or overturn Meta’s decisions on a case-by-case basis.
Meta has referred two cases to the Board, both about videos that show teachers hitting children in school settings.
The first case involves a video posted on Facebook by a media organization in India. In the video, a teacher yells at a young school student for not studying. She repeatedly hits his head and appears to pull at his turban. The face of the child is superimposed with a blurry patch, but he periodically moves his face out of the blurring range. The teacher and other students are visible. The caption notes a state official has called for accountability.
The post received several thousand views, and 10 people reported the content. Because the account receives cross-check protections, one of the reports was escalated to policy experts who determined the content violated Meta’s Child Sexual Exploitation, Abuse and Nudity policy and removed the content.
The second post, also involving a video on Facebook, was posted by a page in France that appears to share local news. The video shows a group of very young children in an educational setting, with one child crying. The teacher hits the child and she falls to the ground, while the other children watch. All faces are blurred in this video. The caption and video reference the specific neighborhood where this was apparently filmed and reference an investigation.
The post received several thousand views and was both reported by a user and identified by an automated system as potentially violating the Child Sexual Exploitation, Abuse and Nudity policy. The content was then removed without human review. It was later escalated internally to policy experts and that decision was confirmed. Then, when Meta was preparing its submissions to the Board, its policy experts decided to allow the content on the platform with a newsworthy allowance and warning screen. According to Meta, media reported that the child’s parents’ attorney had shared the video. For the company, this meant the public interest value outweighed the harm, as the “parents' consent mitigated the privacy and dignity concerns.”
Meta referred both cases to the Board. Under its Child Sexual Exploitation, Abuse and Nudity policy, the company removes “[v]ideos or photos that depict real or non-real non-sexual child abuse regardless of sharing intent,” with no exceptions. Meta stated it takes “a firm stance against sharing non-sexual child abuse content, regardless of the intent, to prioritize the safety, dignity, and privacy of the minor.” According to Meta: “Allowing non-sexual child abuse content in an awareness-raising or condemnation context risks re-traumatizing the victim, while prohibiting such content may be viewed as infringing on the public's ability to be informed.”
The Board selected these cases to explore the tension between sharing information about non-sexual child abuse, including efforts to promote accountability, and protecting children.
The Board would appreciate public comments that address:
- The impact on child victims of abuse and their families of having depictions of their abuse circulate online.
- In what circumstances, if any, is it appropriate for social media companies to allow content that shows children being abused, in light of both the human right to freedom of expression and the human rights principle to respect the best interest of the child.
- How limiting depictions of child abuse may affect efforts to seek accountability for such abuse.
- Standards for reporting on child victims of abuse, and whether blurring and/or other measures serve to limit attempts to identify child victims of abuse.
As part of its decisions, the Board can issue policy recommendations to Meta. While recommendations are not binding, Meta must respond to them within 60 days. As such, the Board welcomes public comments proposing recommendations that are relevant to these cases.
Public Comments
If you or your organization feel you can contribute valuable perspectives that can help with reaching a decision on the cases announced today, you can submit your contributions using the button below. Please note that public comments can be provided anonymously. The public comment window is open for 14 days, closing at 23.59 Pacific Standard Time (PST) on Wednesday 21 May.
What’s Next
Over the next few weeks, Board Members will be deliberating these cases. Once they have reached their decision, we will post it on the Decisions page.
