Digital platforms experience new levels of complexity as their reach and interactions increase. Every day, thousands of pieces of content are classified as unsuitable for permanence on the web. The balance between forms of control and the actions of users has led Meta’s administration toward the implementation of the Oversight board (Mob), a guarantor of freedom of expression and online safety that can provide independent judgment on compliance with the Community standards. Based upon the guidance given by the regulations, content moderation employs two approaches: horizontal, with user reports; vertical, through automated detection driven by Artificial intelligence and the supervision of reviewers, who are employed by the company. While content moderator is just one of the temporary jobs in the gig economy, Ai guarantees efficient control, identifying content classifiable as spam, but it risks encroaching on the field of decision making in certain cases requiring protection such as freedom of expression. Therefore, the Oversight board has a decisive role in determining «what to remove, what to leave, and why», although it does not directly affect the algorithms and market business strategies. Beginning with decisions published from 2020 to 2022, this article profiles the risks citizens face in exercising their rights in relation to the code and the predictive ability of algorithms to implement qualitative discriminations.

Il Meta-diritto dell'oversight board / Santoriello, Sara. - In: RIVISTA DI DIGITAL POLITICS. - ISSN 2785-0072. - 1-2:(2022), pp. 285-302. [10.53227/105078]

Il Meta-diritto dell'oversight board

Sara Santoriello
Primo
Conceptualization
2022

Abstract

Digital platforms experience new levels of complexity as their reach and interactions increase. Every day, thousands of pieces of content are classified as unsuitable for permanence on the web. The balance between forms of control and the actions of users has led Meta’s administration toward the implementation of the Oversight board (Mob), a guarantor of freedom of expression and online safety that can provide independent judgment on compliance with the Community standards. Based upon the guidance given by the regulations, content moderation employs two approaches: horizontal, with user reports; vertical, through automated detection driven by Artificial intelligence and the supervision of reviewers, who are employed by the company. While content moderator is just one of the temporary jobs in the gig economy, Ai guarantees efficient control, identifying content classifiable as spam, but it risks encroaching on the field of decision making in certain cases requiring protection such as freedom of expression. Therefore, the Oversight board has a decisive role in determining «what to remove, what to leave, and why», although it does not directly affect the algorithms and market business strategies. Beginning with decisions published from 2020 to 2022, this article profiles the risks citizens face in exercising their rights in relation to the code and the predictive ability of algorithms to implement qualitative discriminations.
2022
Il Meta-diritto dell'oversight board / Santoriello, Sara. - In: RIVISTA DI DIGITAL POLITICS. - ISSN 2785-0072. - 1-2:(2022), pp. 285-302. [10.53227/105078]
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Santoriello - Il Meta-diritto dell’oversight board.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 321.87 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
321.87 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11588/964786
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact