SAN FRANCISCO: The Meta Oversight Board on Tuesday said the social network was wrong to remove three Facebook posts showing images from a deadly attack on a Moscow concert hall in March.
The posts did violate Meta rules against showing victims during an attack, but their news value should have made them exempt from those rules, according to the independent board.
“In a country such as Russia with a closed media environment, accessibility on social media of such content is even more important,” the board said in a written decision.
“Suppressing matters of vital public concern based on unsubstantiated fears it could promote radicalization is not consistent with Meta’s responsibilities to free expression.”
Each of the posts clearly condemned the attack, expressing solidarity with or concern for victims, according to the board.
Meta should restore the posts — adding a warning that the content could be disturbing to viewers, the board ruled.
Four gunmen stormed the Crocus City venue before the start of a rock concert, opened fire on the audience and set fire to the building, in an assault claimed by the Daesh group.
The assault claimed more than 140 lives, the deadliest attack in Russia for almost 20 years.
The board is referred to as a top court for content disputes at Meta, and the social media giant has agreed to abide by its decisions.
Meta Oversight Board says wrong to remove Moscow attack posts
https://arab.news/jy5yd
Meta Oversight Board says wrong to remove Moscow attack posts
- Non-binding board ruling argues news value justified exemption from platform rules
- Daesh claims responsibility for Moscow concert hall attack that killed over 140 people
UAE outlines approach to AI governance amid regulation debate at World Economic Forum
- Minister of State Maryam Al-Hammadi highlights importance of a robust regulatory framework to complement implementation of AI technology
- Other experts in panel discussion say regulators should address problems as they arise, rather than trying to solve problems that do not yet exist
DUBAI: The UAE has made changes to 90 percent of its laws in the past four years, Maryam Al-Hammadi, minister of state and the secretary-general of the Emirati Cabinet, told the World Economic Forum in Davos on Wednesday.
Speaking during a panel discussion titled “Regulating at the Speed of Code,” she highlighted the importance of having a robust regulatory framework in place to complement the implementation of artificial intelligence technology in the public and private sectors.
The process of this updating and repealing of laws has driven the UAE’s efforts to develop an AI model that can assist in the drafting of legislation, along with collecting feedback from stakeholders on proposed laws and suggesting improvements, she said.
Although AI might be more agile at shaping regulation, “there are some principles that we put in the model that we are developing that we cannot compromise,” Al-Hammadi added. These include rules for human accountability, transparency, privacy and data protection, along with constitutional safeguards and a thorough understanding of the law.
At this stage, “we believe AI can advise but still (the) human is in command,” she said.
Authorities in the UAE are aiming to develop, within a two-year timeline, a shareable model to help other nations learn and benefit from its experiences, Al-Hammadi added.
Argentina’s minister of deregulation and state transformation, Federico Sturzenegger, warned against overregulation at the cost of innovation.
Politicians often react to a “salient event” by overreacting, he said, describing most regulators as “very imaginative of all the terrible things that will happen to people if they’re free.”
He said that “we have to take more risk,” and regulators should wait to address problems as they arise rather than trying to create solutions for problems that do not yet exist.
This sentiment was echoed by Joel Kaplan, Meta’s chief global affairs officer, who said “imaginative policymakers” often focus more on risks and potential harms than on the economic and growth benefits of innovation.
He pointed to Europe as an example of this, arguing that an excessive focus on “all the possible harms” of new technologies has, over time, reduced competitiveness and risks leaving the region behind in what he described as a “new technological revolution.”
