Meta Officially Bans Journalism

Meta spokesperson?Emily Westcott has confirmed that independent journalism is prohibited under Meta's new content moderation policies.

Meta's recent decision to ban independent journalism from its platforms, including Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram, signals a troubling escalation in its approach to content moderation. Framed to prevent the spread of misinformation, this policy undermines one of the most crucial pillars of a free society: the ability of independent journalists to report and disseminate information by unilaterally imposing this ban and relying heavily on artificial intelligence (AI) moderation to do so.

Meta's claim that it encourages free expression is all but true. It is stifling legitimate human voices, amplifying errors, and allowing AI to drive the car fully. It destroys free speech by proactively de-platforming independent voices; we should all be concerned.

Overview of Meta's New Policies

Meta has declared its intention to prohibit independent journalism under the guise of protecting users from misinformation.

While specific details about the policy's enforcement mechanisms remain vague, reports indicate that AI-driven moderation already plays a significant role in identifying and removing content that the platform deems to violate its standards is evident.

After my accounts—WhatsApp, Instagram, and Facebook—were banned at once without cause, I followed the appeal process but eventually was told that the ban was being upheld, though without any proof or reasoning. It was just 'no,' essentially. I was also not given access to my data.

AI Moderation has already replaced human sensibility.

AI moderation is a double-edged sword. While it can process vast amounts of data quickly, it lacks the understanding required to accurately evaluate human context, particularly journalism. Meta's systems have repeatedly misclassified posts, often silencing marginalized voices or independent creators while allowing harmful content to proliferate.

The proof of this is splattered all over the internet, from small businesses that have had their?livelihoods ripped out from under them to journalists that have found themselves de-platformed for no reason and without any system of appeal.

Investigative articles on corruption, human rights abuses, or political scandals are being flagged as "misinformation" simply because they challenge the status quo (Sources: Amnesty International, The Guardian, Human Rights Watch).

Many influential people have also reported being hijacked and banned by coordinated efforts made by automated "botting" or IO account reporting, which AI does not understand. So, it removes them, and the humans agree with the AI.

Many of them who are dependent on social media to earn a living lose it all.

These mistakes are not just inconvenient—they are harmful. Journalists often operate under tight deadlines, and removing their work from a widely used platform can erase months of effort, jeopardize their credibility, and deprive the public of vital information.

The Extortion Scam Connection

Adding to this issue is Meta's history of tolerating extortion scams facilitated by its platforms. Have a look at r/facebookdisabled if you don't believe me.

There are also mines of GitHub repositories with open-source scripts that anyone with basic-level programming knowledge can run to have an account taken down with little effort.

Scammers exploit weak content moderation policies to coerce individuals and businesses into paying money to restore accounts or remove defamatory content. Since my accounts have been taken down, I, like many, have been inundated by scammers demanding money to bring it back.

By banning independent journalism, Meta inadvertently empowers these bad actors, creating an environment where legitimate voices are silenced and scams flourish unchecked.

A Fascist Design Pattern

Meta's appeal process for content removal and account bans has been described as opaque, punitive, and almost Kafkaesque in its design. Designer Therese B. Fessenden shares in an article on LinkedIn an intricately designed appeal system as a model of "fascist design"—a process that denies users meaningful recourse, relies heavily on AI-generated decisions, and offers no transparency or accountability. She was also banned, and her accounts have still not been restored.

Meta's appeal system often leaves users in limbo, unable to contest wrongful decisions or regain access to their accounts. This system disproportionately affects independent journalists, small businesses, and creators who rely on these platforms to reach their audiences. By denying these users a fair process, Meta undermines its claims of fostering a safe and inclusive digital environment.

A Call for Accountability

Meta 's new policy to ban independent journalism is an affront to democratic values and an alarming indication of the platform's priorities. The reliance on flawed AI systems and an inequitable appeal process create a chilling effect on free speech and public discourse. If Meta is genuinely committed to combating misinformation, it must:

1. Revise its policies to protect independent journalism and ensure that AI moderation systems are supplemented by human oversight.
2. Introduce transparency and accountability in its appeal process, offering users clear explanations for decisions and meaningful opportunities to contest them.
3. Combat extortion scams by strengthening security measures and imposing stricter penalties on those who exploit the platform for fraud.

Independent journalism is the cornerstone of an informed society.

By silencing these voices, Meta is a part of the unseen atrocities that we are reporting on in the non-Western world.