self-hosting-advocacy/harmful-communications-201910
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Releases Wiki Activity

Behavciou

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Éibhear Ó hAnluain 2019-09-18 09:08:45 +01:00
parent 0929c13a91
commit 15e47da4c1
1 changed files with 32 additions and 0 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

32
HarmfulCommunications201908.org
View file

@ -672,6 +672,38 @@
on what the service providers do about it. Many argue that they are on what the service providers do about it. Many argue that they are
not doing anything, or at least not enough. not doing anything, or at least not enough.
However, this is an unfortunate mischaracterisation of the
situation. For example, facebook employs -- either directly or
through out-sourcing contracts -- many 10s of thousands
"moderators", whose job is to make a decision to remove offensive
material or not, to suppress someone's freedom of expression or
not, based on a set of if-then-else questions.
- It's illegal in Germany to say anything that can be construed as
glorifying the Holacaust. In the UK it isn't. Facebook can
suppress such information from users it believes are in Germany,
but to do so for those in the UK would be an illegal denial of
free expression, regardless of how objectionable the material
is. What is facebook to do with users in Germany who route their
internet connections through the UK? Facebook has no knowledge of
this unusual routing, and to learn about it could be a violation
of the user's right to privacy. Should facebook be criminally
liable for a German user seeing statements that are illegal in
Germany?
- Consider the genocide of Armenian people in Turkey in 1915. It is
illegal to claim it happened in Turkey. However, it's illegal in
France to claim it didn't happen. In most other countries,
neither claim is illegal. What can a service like facebook do
when faced with 3 options, 2 of which are mutually exclusive?
Literally, should they be criminally liable both if they do /and/
if they don't?
Modertors have no more than a minute to determine whether a
statement complies with the law of not, and this includes figuring
out whether the posting meets the definitions of abusive or
harmful, and whether it is indeed intended to meet that
definition. For example, imagine an abusive tweet, and then the
target of the abuse quoting it
** CONSTODO Content moderation ** CONSTODO Content moderation
** CONSTODO Investigation support ** CONSTODO Investigation support
* CONSTODO Answers to consultation questions * CONSTODO Answers to consultation questions