LONDON: Facebook owner Meta released its first annual human rights report on Thursday, following years of accusations that it turned a blind eye to online abuses that fueled real-world violence in places like India and Myanmar.
The report, which covers due diligence performed in 2020 and 2021, includes a summary of a controversial human rights impact assessment of India that Meta commissioned law firm Foley Hoag to conduct.
Human rights groups including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have demanded the release of the India assessment in full, accusing Meta of stalling in a joint letter sent in January.
In its summary, Meta said the law firm had noted the potential for “salient human rights risks” involving Meta’s platforms, including “advocacy of hatred that incites hostility, discrimination, or violence.”
The assessment, it added, did not probe “accusations of bias in content moderation.”
Ratik Asokan, a representative from India Civil Watch International who participated in the assessment and later organized the joint letter, told Reuters the summary struck him as an attempt by Meta to “whitewash” the firm’s findings.
“It’s as clear evidence as you can get that they’re very uncomfortable with the information that’s in that report,” he said. “At least show the courage to release the executive summary so we can see what the independent law firm has said.”
Human Rights Watch researcher Deborah Brown likewise called the summary “selective” and said it “brings us no closer” to understanding the company’s role in the spread of hate speech in India or commitments it will make to address the issue.
Rights groups for years have raised alarms about anti-Muslim hate speech stoking tensions in India, Meta’s largest market globally by number of users.
Meta’s top public policy executive in India stepped down in 2020 following a Wall Street Journal report that she opposed applying the company’s rules to Hindu nationalist figures flagged internally for promoting violence.
In its report, Meta said it was studying the India recommendations, but did not commit to implementing them as it did with other rights assessments.
Asked about the difference, Meta Human Rights Director Miranda Sissons pointed to United Nations guidelines cautioning against risks to “affected stakeholders, personnel or to legitimate requirements of commercial confidentiality.”
“The format of the reporting can be influenced by a variety of factors, including security reasons,” Sissons told Reuters.
Sissons, who joined Meta in 2019, said her team is now comprised of eight people, while about 100 others work on human rights with related teams.
In addition to country-level assessments, the report outlined her team’s work on Meta’s COVID-19 response and Ray-Ban Stories smart glasses, which involved flagging possible privacy risks and effects on vulnerable groups.
Sissons said analysis of augmented and virtual reality technologies, which Meta has prioritized with its bet on the “metaverse,” is largely taking place this year and would be discussed in subsequent reports.
Facebook-owner Meta releases first human rights report
https://arab.news/crs9f
Facebook-owner Meta releases first human rights report
- Meta releases its first annual human rights report following accusations of turning a blind eye to online abuse
- The report includes a summary of a controversial human rights impact assessment of India that Meta commissioned law firm Foley Hoag to conduct
Saudi Media Forum urges ethical coverage as crises redefine Arab journalism
- Raw news without context can mislead audiences and distort credibility, experts say
RIYADH: Arab media was born in crisis and shaped by conflict rather than stability, Malik Al-Rougi, general manager of Thaqafeyah Channel, said during the Saudi Media Forum in Riyadh on Wednesday.
Al-Rougi was speaking during a panel titled “Media and Crises: The Battle for Awareness and the Challenges of Responsible Coverage,” which examined how news organizations across the region navigated credibility and professional standards amid fast-moving regional developments.
“Today, when you build a media organization and invest in it for many years, a single crisis can destroy it,” he said.
Referring to recent events, Al-Rougi said that he had witnessed news channels whose credibility “collapsed overnight.”
“In journalistic and political terms, this is not a process of news production. It is a process of propaganda production,” he said. “The damage caused by such a post … is enormous for an institution in which millions, perhaps billions, have been invested.”
When a media outlet shifts from professionalism and credibility toward “propaganda,” he added, it moves away from its core role.
“A crisis can work for you or against you,” Al-Rougi added. “When, in the heart of a crisis, you demonstrate high credibility and composure, you move light-years ahead. When you fail to adhere to ethical standards, you lose light-years as well.”
Abdullah Al-Assaf, professor of political media studies at Imam Muhammad bin Saud Islamic University, said that in many crises across the Arab world, agendas and directives had often prevailed over professionalism.
“Credibility was buried,” he added.
Hasan Al-Mustafa, writer and researcher at Al-Arabiya channel, said that raw information could be subject to multiple interpretations if not placed within a proper political, security, historical or geographical context.
He added that such an approach was urgently needed during periods of political and security volatility in the Middle East.
When, in the heart of a crisis, you demonstrate high credibility and composure, you move light-years ahead. When you fail to adhere to ethical standards, you lose light-years as well.
Malik Al-Rougi Thaqafeyah, Channel general manager
“This objectivity, or this reliability, is a great responsibility,” Al-Mustafa said. “It is reflected not only in its impact on the audience, but also on the credibility of the content creator.”
Al-Mustafa warned against populism and haste in coverage, saying that they risked deepening crises rather than providing informed public perspectives.
He also said that competition with social media influencers had pushed some traditional outlets to imitate influencer-driven models instead of strengthening their own professional standards.
“Our media has been crisis-driven for decades,” he said, describing much of the region’s coverage as reactive rather than proactive.
During a separate panel titled “The Official Voice in the Digital Age: Strategies of Influence,” speakers discussed how rapid technological and social changes were reshaping the role of institutional spokespersons.
Abdulrahman Alhusain, official spokesperson of the Saudi Ministry of Commerce, said that the role was no longer limited to delivering statements or reacting to events.
“Today, the spokesperson must be the director of the scene — the director of the media narrative,” he said.
Audiences, he added, no longer accept isolated pieces of information unless they were presented within a clear narrative and structure.
“In the past, a spokesperson was expected to deliver formal presentations. Today, what is required is dialogue. The role may once required defense, but now it must involve discussion, the exchange of views, and open, candid conversation aimed at development — regardless of how harsh the criticism may be.”
He said that spokespersons must also be guided by data, digital indicators and artificial intelligence to understand public opinion before speaking.
“You must choose the right timing, the right method and the right vocabulary. You must anticipate a crisis before it happens. That is your role.”
Abdullah Aloraij, general manager of media at the Riyadh Region Municipality, said that the most important skill for a spokesperson today was the ability to analyze and monitor public discourse.
“The challenge is not in transferring words, but in transferring understanding and impact in the right way,” he said.
