Amidst criticism in the (Federal Supreme Court), owner of Instagram and WhatsApp, states that “there is no inertia” on the part of the company against harmful content, “contrary to what has been heard in the public debate”.
The company’s note cites article 19 of the Marco Civil da Internet and the “debate on updating internet rules”, without explicitly mentioning, however, the judgment on the matter that is taking place in the Supreme Court. Facebook is a party to one of the actions before the STF.
Despite rebutting criticisms that have been suffered in the public debate related to the discussion regarding the responsibility of networks, this Tuesday’s publication (3) refers to the measures taken by Meta in response to the resolutions of the TSE (Superior Electoral Court).
According to the report, in the electoral period between August and October this year, more than 2.9 million pieces of content were removed on Facebook, Instagram and Threads in Brazil for violating the “policies on bullying and harassment, hate speech and violence and incitement”. .
“As the numbers below on content moderation attest, there is no inertia on the part of Meta to detect and act on harmful content, contrary to what has been heard in the public debate”, says the note.
The company also denies that its business model thrives in a “toxic online environment”, arguing that advertisers do not want their brands linked to this type of content.
“The debate on updating internet rules is important, including regarding article 19 of the Marco Civil da Internet. The rule establishes a system of holding application providers responsible for content posted by third parties, prioritizing freedom of expression, at the same time allowing platforms moderate the content posted on them”, says the note.
The central theme of the STF judgment is article 19 of the .
he says that networks are only subject to pay compensation for content posted by a third party if, after a court decision ordering its removal, they keep the content on the air. The purpose of the rule would be to protect freedom of expression.
The current rule does not prevent platforms from applying their own rules to remove content. Critics, on the other hand, say that it encourages the inertia of networks, by not giving them any incentive to act.
Of the actions guided by the STF on social networks, two deal with the responsibility of platforms. The main difference between them is that one is before and the other is after the approval of the Marco Civil da Internet.
So far only Minister Dias Toffoli, rapporteur for one of the actions, has started to vote. In addition, there were oral arguments from the parties’ lawyers and representatives of entities registered to contribute to the process.
The two days of the trial were marked by comments critical of the networks. One of the most vocal was delivered by minister Alexandre de Moraes, who stated that the coup attacks demonstrated the failure of the self-regulation system of social media platforms.
“January 8th demonstrated the total failure of the self-regulation system of all networks, of all big techs. Bankruptcy because everything was organized by the networks. Or largely by the networks,” he said.
