Facebook can now remove any user's posts that legally harm the company
It comes after the company threatens to block all news in Australia on its platform
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Facebook has said that it will now remove any content that could pose regulatory or legal problems for the company.
“Effective October 1, 2020, section 3.2 of our Terms of Service will be updated to include: 'We also can remove or restrict access to your content, services or information if we determine that doing so is reasonably necessary to avoid or mitigate adverse legal or regulatory impacts to Facebook,” reads the company’s new terms and conditions.
The change comes as the social media giant, and other technology companies, are having to deal with new threats against their ecosystems from governments.
Recently, the company said that it would no longer allow local or international news to be published in Australia if new legislation was passed that would make it pay for news content put on its platform.
It would allow news publishers to bargain with Facebook for a price for publishing content, as the current circumstance has “resulted in news media businesses accepting less favourable terms for the inclusion of news on digital platform services than they would otherwise agree to“.
Facebook said the decision “defies logic” and would harm Australia’s news ecosystem.
"This global update provides more flexibility for us to change our services, including in Australia, to continue to operate and support our users in response to potential regulation or legal action," a spokesperson said.
Recently, president Trump also proposed a change to Section 230, a piece of American legislation that protects all companies from legal liability from content posted by its users.
It came as Twitter decided to fact-check the president’s tweets which incorrectly linked voting by mail to election fraud.
The president said that the legislation gave companies “unchecked power”. Many conservatives, including the president, have stated that platforms protected by Section 230 need to be politically neutral. This is untrue.
At the time, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said that social media companies should not be the “arbiter of truth” and criticised Twitter’s decision.
Facebook has consistently struggled with handling freedom of speech on its platforms. It recently introduced an oversight board which would oversee the “most challenging content issues” for the social network.
The social media company established the board in an attempt to ensure free expression is protected when it comes up against against Facebook’s terms of service.
In an op-ed written at the time, the four co-chairs of the committee the four co-chairs of the board said that they were “independent of Facebook” and that decisions would be made based on the judgement of the members rather than what would be beneficial to the social media company.
It is unclear how this recent change to Facebook’s terms of service would interact with the oversight board.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments