Facebook unable to avoid controversial decision on Trump ban

WASHINGTON (Sinclair Broadcast Group) — Facebook's quasi-independent Oversight Board issued its ruling Wednesday on the company's indefinite suspension of Donald Trump's account, starting a six-month countdown for the social media giant to either clarify its policies and allow the former president back on the platform, or permanently cut him off.

In its finding, the 20-person Oversight Board upheld Facebook's decision to suspend Trump's account over the risk of inciting "serious violence" following the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. The board also faulted the company for issuing an "indefinite ban" that was inconsistent with existing policies.

"Facebook seeks to avoid its responsibilities," the Board wrote, charging it was up to the company, not an independent board, to "apply and justify a defined penalty" against the former U.S. president.

Keeping a user off the platform for an undefined period without criteria for when or whether the account would be restored was "not permissible," the group asserted.

A ban is still in effect for the foreseeable future. After four months and ample funding for its research, the Oversight Board merely extended Facebook's deadline until November to either permanently disable Trump's account or allow him to return under a set of "clear, necessary and proportionate" penalties for future policy violations.

"It shows how hard it is to draw the line between freedom of speech and concerns about public safety," said Chris Bail, director of the Polarization Lab at Duke University. "If 20 of the world's top legal minds and human rights leaders and $130 million couldn't produce a decision, I think it an indication of just how hard and far-reaching these decisions can be."

Facebook requested the board review the decision to ban Trump's account, in part, as a test case for how the company should handle statements by other political leaders. They questioned how to protect speech that was "newsworthy" against the potential it could incite violence or undermine human rights.

The board determined that, while all users should be held to the same standards, high government officials have a greater power to cause harm. Because of that risk, they recommended that Facebook should either delete those accounts or suspend them long enough to "deter misconduct" or "protect against imminent harm." At the same time, they urged the company to dedicate massive resources and expertise to assess the risk of harm from influential accounts around the world.

Other social media companies will certainly be watching the process with interest to see how Facebook handles the thorny issues and public reactions. Following the Jan. 6, insurrection at the Capitol, Twitter and Google's YouTube also suspended Trump's accounts. Twitter has said its ban is permanent. YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki recently indicated the company would consider lifting the ban when the risk of violence had decreased.

With such a high-profile case, Facebook's approach to the Trump ban could set content moderation standards for the entire industry. Whether it can follow through on enforcing its standards equitably will have a direct impact on the company's credibility, both on the public and political perceptions of the company.

In a statement Wednesday morning, former President Trump threatened that Facebook, Twitter and Google "must pay a political price" for cutting off his social media accounts.

Republicans lashed out at the company, revising claims of anti-conservative bias and censorship. "If they can ban President Trump, all conservative voices could be next," tweeted Republican House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, promising that a GOP majority would "rein in" Big Tech.

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, a staunch Trump ally wrote, "Break them up," a reference to bipartisan calls to split up the country's largest tech companies.

Reacting to the Oversight Board report, Sen. Ben Ben Ray Luján, D-N.M, pledged to hold social media companies accountable for combating the spread of misinformation, hate speech and dangerous content. "Facebook must do more to address misinformation and hate speech on its platform," he charged.

Across the board, critics are wondering why it took the Oversight Board nearly four months to review the action only to punt it back to Facebook for a final decision.

"We didn't need a four-month, unaccountable, secretive process to tell us what we already knew: that Donald Trump needed to be permanently banned from Facebook," said Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League. "He should have been removed from the platform long ago."

No matter the course of action, Facebook now runs the risk of alienating some group. If the company allows Trump to return to the platform, it will incense those demanding a complete ban. If he's removed, the company will rile up conservative outrage over Big Tech censorship.

"Facebook can't win in that perspective," said Scott Talan, an expert on social media at American University's School of Communication. "At this point, they should just do what they think is the right thing to do. They're not going to satisfy everyone. If they try to play it like a politician, they'll end up in a worse place of no one being happy and not applying fair and consistent rules."

Either outcome will stir controversy. Social media users are already rallying around the hashtags #DeleteFacebook and #BanTrump.

"The bigger issue is this: Facebook is a business," said Cayce Myers, the director of graduate studies at Virginia Tech's School of Communication. "They make money. They rely on users. They rely on advertisers. So the question is, will their policymaking end up hurting their business?"

While there's a risk that investors, users or advertisers might abandon the platform, it doesn't appear to be materializing. Facebook continues to boast 2.6 billion monthly users and remains, in some parts of the world synonymous with the internet.

Last week, the company reported a stunning 48% increase in revenue during the first quarter of 2021, driven, in part, by higher-price ads. The company's stock took a slight dip Wednesday after the Oversight Board's announcement but it's still up over 15% from January when it banned Trump.

Facebook is also battling other problems that are likely to become bigger than content moderation and deplatforming an ex-president. The company is facing antitrust investigations by the Justice Department, Federal Trade Commission and at least 47 state attorneys general. Last year, the social media giant paid a record $5 billion fine to the FTC for improperly using consumer data.

At the same time, there are few alternatives to the social media giant. Parler, a conservative social media platform, failed to get off the ground after being dumped by Amazon Web Services and other major providers following the Jan. 6 riot.

Former President Trump has threatened to set up his own social media platform. This week he launched a new section on his website called "From the Desk of Donald J. Trump," which vaguely resembles a social media feed. Billed as "a place to speak freely and safely," the site is a place where Trump can broadcast to his followers without interacting with them, except through contributions.

Trump's social media ban was prompted by his comments to supporters on Jan. 6 where he praised rioters as "great patriots" and "very special." The video became a turning point in the years-long war between the 45th president and social media companies.

Before Trump was banned from Facebook and Twitter, the companies revised policies to crack down on election misinformation, COVID-19 misinformation and hate speech. Fact-checks were added to Trump's posts. They were downgraded in searches and buried under warnings that the information was "misleading" or violated policies on the glorification of violence.