The need for simple, easily understandable rules

Social media moderation should not be nearly as difficult as it is made out to be. There will always be challenges, but it need not be as complex as it is now. More importantly, it should not be difficult for social media users to understand what they are and are not allowed to post on the various platforms.

The New York Times was recently given more than 1400 pages of rules for content on Facebook that are enforced by 15,000 moderators worldwide. Facebook moderators often struggle with what should be allowed to stay and what should be removed, which leads to a lot of mistakes.

Continue reading

The implications of being a “publisher” or a “platform”

When you want the federal government to “do something,” always assume that proposed action will eventually be used against you. It is terribly na├»ve to do otherwise. The power you grant the government when controlled by people you like will also be available to the government when it is controlled by people you do not like. That is the primary lesson I wish conservatives would take from designating Twitter and Facebook as “publishers” instead of platforms.

There is a lot of talk on the Right about designating both Facebook and Twitter as “publishers” instead of a “platforms.” This is not totally without merit, especially as both platforms are increasingly using editorial standards for content. Facebook’s algorithm controls what you see in your news feed, and Twitter is moving toward making dissent on transgender ideology unwelcome on the site. A site like the Daily Wire, which screens every post, is liable for content posted there. Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, message boards and blog/website comment sections are not. If Facebook and Twitter are going to be implementing editorial standards on user posts, should they be treated as publishers?

No.

Continue reading