Abstract
The research investigates the performance of the Meta Oversight Board (OB) in cases of content moderation where socio-cultural issues (should have) been taken into account, with a particular focus on the evolution of decision-making and policy over time. The research analyses the cases systematically and chronologically from the creation of the OB until the end of 2024. The hypothesis of the analysis is: Null hypothesis (H₀): the type of socio-linguistic issue (explicit or implicit) does not significantly affect decision characteristics. For testing, I used the Chi-Square test of independence. In this case, I tested for the following correlations: 1) type of socio-linguistic question: explicit vs. implicit and 2) decision characteristics: outcome (upheld or overturned), content type (text, image, video) and platform (Facebook, Instagram, Threads). Furthermore, through statistical analysis, the study maps the geographical distribution of cases and identifies regions where insufficient knowledge of local social nuances made it difficult to moderate content. The research sheds light on the importance of linguistic and cultural competences in moderation practice and the impact of these factors on the fairness and accuracy of decisions. The findings highlight the need for continued policy refinement and increased training of moderators to ensure context-aware moderation. This study contributes to the debate on improving global content governance frameworks by calling for a more nuanced approach that takes into account the socio-linguistic diversity of Meta’s user base.
Presenters
Réka Brigitta SzaniszlóAssistant Professor, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, International and Regional Studies Institute, University of Szeged, Hungary
Details
Presentation Type
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session
Theme
KEYWORDS
Cultural Diversity, Meta, Oversight Board, Content Moderation, Human Rights
