META’S OVERSIGHT BOARD & THE PROBLEM WITH COMPARING IT TO SUPREME COURTS
By Rajul Sharma
(Lawyer; Leiden University (2020), Tilburg University (2022))
| Abstract We live in a digital age. In all spheres of our lives, we rely heavily on technology. In the last two decades, our conversations with each other have also moved to the virtual world. With the rise of social media platforms such as Facebook and Instagram, we are now interacting with each other more and more in a digital space. These are remarkable strides, as these social media platforms help bring people from across the globe closer. However, there are also several downsides to the proliferation of social media platforms as well. Amid the massive amount of content users share on Facebook and Instagram, there is a lot of content that may not meet the standards of keeping the platforms a safe and secure environment for everyone that companies seek to achieve. That’s why it becomes important to regulate the content posted online. That’s why Meta formed the Oversight Board to pass decisions on what content to take down and what to not. As Meta is a powerful, influential company, its Oversight Board has been compared to a traditional “supreme court”. However, this is a misguided comparison and risks undermining the power a traditional supreme court yields. In this short article, the author shall briefly discuss the Oversight Board and its functions and if it is appropriate to club it in the same group as a supreme court. |
| Keywords social media, digital space, Meta. |
| Type | Research Paper |
| Information | Lex Humanitariae: Journal for a Change, Volume III Issue II, Pages 50-54 |
| DOI Link | https://doi-ds.org/doilink/01.2023-29658197/lexhumanitariae/V3I2/A7 |
| ISSN | 2582-5216 |
| Creative Commons | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. |
| Copyright | © 2022- Lex Humanitariae: Journal for a Change |