Voices and values: the challenging odyssey of Meta to harmonize human rights with content moderation

Abstract

Abstract This study explores the evolving complexities of digital media and their impact on the boundaries of free expression within the framework of International Human Rights Law. It scrutinizes the ‘harm criteria’, a pivotal component in balancing freedom of expression against potential societal and individual harm. Meta, with its nearly three billion users worldwide, is analysed as a primary case study. The company has adopted more nuanced community standards that emphasize inclusivity and the value of diverse voices, especially those from marginalized communities. This transition presents several challenges, including navigating ambiguous policy frameworks, addressing the complexities of automated moderation, and reconciling global norms with local laws. Employing a qualitative methodology and textual analysis of Meta's public policy documents and case studies from its Oversight Board, the research aims to provide a thorough analysis of how Meta manages the delicate balance between protecting freedom of speech and enforcing harm criteria. The study highlights the technological, ethical, and legal tensions that emerge in a globalized digital environment.