Power

Facebook’s transparency report shows what Facebook wants you to see

For all of the granular detail about removing hate speech, Facebook leaves lots of questions unanswered.

Facebook

Facebook's latest content moderation report reveals strides and setbacks.

Photo: Chesnot/Getty Images

On a call with reporters Thursday, Facebook's vice president of integrity, Guy Rosen, said that Facebook wants to "lead the industry in transparency." The call accompanied the release of Facebook's fourth-quarter content moderation report, which shares in granular detail the amount of content Facebook removed for various violations of its policies and why.

But what's become increasingly clear over the years that Facebook has published these reports is just how much the company leaves out. Also clear: Facebook hopes these reports will serve as a model for regulators to impose on the tech industry writ large.

Tech giants and the people who study them have begun to recognize that there's more to content moderation than the decisions tech companies make around taking posts down or leaving them up. Equally if not more important is the way companies' algorithms amplify content that violates their policies by recommending it to users or pushing it to the top of users' feeds. In the run-up to the U.S. election, for instance, Facebook's internal researchers found that the majority of political groups they were recommending to users were overrun with calls for violence, a realization that prompted Facebook to — temporarily and then permanently — remove political groups from recommendations all together.

But that sort of insight about how Facebook has actually promoted content that violates its own policies is nowhere to be found in the report by the company that says it strives to lead the industry on transparency.

Neither is information on some particularly dicey categories of violations, including incitements to violence. That, after all, is the policy that prompted Facebook to ban former President Donald Trump from the platform earlier this year, following a riot at the U.S. Capitol. And yet, Facebook's transparency report offers no indication of whether such incitements to violence were on the rise in 2020 or whether Facebook acted more aggressively to stop them.

On the call, Rosen called the reports a "multi-year journey" and said Facebook is working to expand them to include additional violation categories, like incitements to violence. The company is also working on ways to report the number of accounts, pages and groups it's taking action on, not just the posts themselves. "We don't have any immediate timeline for that, but it's absolutely on the list of things we want to get to," Rosen said.

When it comes to violations in groups and pages that appear in recommendations, Rosen added, "We don't have any numbers yet to share." At least, not publicly.

For now, the report and the accompanying blog post lean heavily on the strides Facebook has made in cracking down on hate speech and organized hate groups. And it has made strides. In the last quarter of 2019, Facebook removed just 1.6 million pieces of content from organized hate groups, compared to 6.4 million in the final quarter of 2020. The uptick indicates just how much the company's policies evolved in 2020 when it comes to homegrown militia and hate groups like the Proud Boys and violent conspiracy theories like QAnon. Facebook had resisted calls for years to ban those groups, but came around to the idea in the latter half of 2020 as the risk of violence around the 2020 election grew. Since then, Facebook has removed more than 3,000 pages and 10,000 groups associated with QAnon alone. Facebook also attributed gains it made in removing more hate speech in 2020 to advancements in automated technology, particularly with regard to hate speech in Arabic, Spanish and Portuguese.

And yet, the offline violence Facebook has fueled over the last several months in the U.S. suggests that this evolution is coming far too late in Facebook's history. The report also obscures the limits of Facebook's own definition of hate speech, which refers to direct attacks on the basis of "race, ethnicity, national origin, disability, religious affiliation, caste, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity and serious disease." The sort of politically-motivated hate that seemed to fuel the Jan. 6 riot goes unaccounted for in this report — and in Facebook's policies.

That's not to say that Facebook's report only shows the good stuff. Despite the at least technical progress Facebook made on hate speech last year, in other crucial categories, the report suggests Facebook's content moderation systems suffered serious setbacks on both Facebook and Instagram, most notably in the category of child sexual abuse material. Last quarter, Facebook reported its lowest levels of enforcement against child exploitation on the platform since it began reporting these stats in 2018. In the fourth quarter, it removed 5.4 million pieces of child nudity and exploitation content, compared to 12.4 million pieces in the third quarter, and not that's because the overall volume of that content dropped. Instead, Facebook attributed the decline in enforcement to a "technical issue" that arose in mid-November, which has since been fixed.

"When the error was discovered, we fixed it, and are in the process of going back to retroactively remove all of that content that was missed," Rosen said.

It is true that Facebook reports far more information than other tech companies do. For instance, it reports the "prevalence" of violating content on its platforms. That is, not just the amount of content that it takes down, but the amount of content it missed. In the last quarter, for instance, as hate speech takedowns grew, the prevalence of hate speech on the platform also dropped, with users seeing seven to eight hate-speech posts for every 10,000 views of content. "I think you know we remain the only company to publish these numbers," Facebook's vice president of content policy Monika Bickert said on the call.

Facebook's vision of transparency — and all of the holes contained in that vision — are especially relevant now, as the company begins to push for light-handed regulation. In particular, Facebook has urged lawmakers interested in reforming Section 230 to adopt laws that require tech companies to be more transparent about content moderation. For Facebook, that would constitute a compromise that stops short of stripping away any of the protections that Section 230 gives tech platforms. As it calls for more mandated transparency, Facebook is clearly setting up its reports as an example.

"As we talk about putting in place regulations or reforming Section 230 in the U.S., we should be considering how to hold companies accountable to take action on harmful content," Bickert said. "We think the numbers we're providing today can help inform that conversation."

They very well might. And if they do, it will be all the more important for lawmakers to look critically at not just what those numbers reveal, but also what they hide.

Podcasts

1Password's CEO is ready for a password-free future

Fresh off a $620 million raise, 1Password CEO Jeff Shiner talks about the future of passwords.

1Password is a password manager, but it has plans to be even more.

Business is booming for 1Password. The company just announced it has raised $620 million, at a valuation of $6.8 billion, from a roster of A-list celebrities and well-known venture capitalists.

But what does a password manager need with $620 million? Jeff Shiner, 1Password’s CEO, has some plans. He’s building the team fast — 1Password has tripled in size in the last two years, up to 500 employees, and plans to double again this year — while also expanding the vision of what a password manager can do. 1Password has long been a consumer-first product, but the biggest opportunity lies in bringing the company’s knowhow, its user experience, and its security chops into the business world. 1Password already has more than 100,000 business customers, and it plans to expand fast.

Keep Reading Show less
David Pierce

David Pierce ( @pierce) is Protocol's editorial director. Prior to joining Protocol, he was a columnist at The Wall Street Journal, a senior writer with Wired, and deputy editor at The Verge. He owns all the phones.

Sponsored Content

A CCO’s viewpoint on top enterprise priorities in 2022

The 2022 non-predictions guide to what your enterprise is working on starting this week

As Honeywell’s global chief commercial officer, I am privileged to have the vantage point of seeing the demands, challenges and dynamics that customers across the many sectors we cater to are experiencing and sharing.

This past year has brought upon all businesses and enterprises an unparalleled change and challenge. This was the case at Honeywell, for example, a company with a legacy in innovation and technology for over a century. When I joined the company just months before the pandemic hit we were already in the midst of an intense transformation under the leadership of CEO Darius Adamczyk. This transformation spanned our portfolio and business units. We were already actively working on products and solutions in advanced phases of rollouts that the world has shown a need and demand for pre-pandemic. Those included solutions in edge intelligence, remote operations, quantum computing, warehouse automation, building technologies, safety and health monitoring and of course ESG and climate tech which was based on our exceptional success over the previous decade.

Keep Reading Show less
Jeff Kimbell
Jeff Kimbell is Senior Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer at Honeywell. In this role, he has broad responsibilities to drive organic growth by enhancing global sales and marketing capabilities. Jeff has nearly three decades of leadership experience. Prior to joining Honeywell in 2019, Jeff served as a Partner in the Transformation Practice at McKinsey & Company, where he worked with companies facing operational and financial challenges and undergoing “good to great” transformations. Before that, he was an Operating Partner at Silver Lake Partners, a global leader in technology and held a similar position at Cerberus Capital LP. Jeff started his career as a Manufacturing Team Manager and Engineering Project Manager at Procter & Gamble before becoming a strategy consultant at Bain & Company and holding executive roles at Dell EMC and Transamerica Corporation. Jeff earned a B.S. in electrical engineering at Kansas State University and an M.B.A. at Dartmouth College.
Policy

Biden wants to digitize the government. Can these techies deliver?

A December executive order requires federal agencies to overhaul clunky systems. Meet the team trying to make that happen.

The dramatic uptick in people relying on government services, combined with the move to remote work, rendered inconvenient government processes downright painful.

Photo: Joe Daniel Price/Getty Images

Early last year, top White House officials embarked on a fact-finding mission with technical leaders inside government agencies. They wanted to know the answer to a specific question: If there was anything federal agencies could do to improve the average American’s experience interacting with the government, what would it be?

The list, of course, was a long one.

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.

Boost 2

Can Matt Mullenweg save the internet?

He's turning Automattic into a different kind of tech giant. But can he take on the trillion-dollar walled gardens and give the internet back to the people?

Matt Mullenweg, CEO of Automattic and founder of WordPress, poses for Protocol at his home in Houston, Texas.
Photo: Arturo Olmos for Protocol

In the early days of the pandemic, Matt Mullenweg didn't move to a compound in Hawaii, bug out to a bunker in New Zealand or head to Miami and start shilling for crypto. No, in the early days of the pandemic, Mullenweg bought an RV. He drove it all over the country, bouncing between Houston and San Francisco and Jackson Hole with plenty of stops in national parks. In between, he started doing some tinkering.

The tinkering is a part-time gig: Most of Mullenweg’s time is spent as CEO of Automattic, one of the web’s largest platforms. It’s best known as the company that runs WordPress.com, the hosted version of the blogging platform that powers about 43% of the websites on the internet. Since WordPress is open-source software, no company technically owns it, but Automattic provides tools and services and oversees most of the WordPress-powered internet. It’s also the owner of the booming ecommerce platform WooCommerce, Day One, the analytics tool Parse.ly and the podcast app Pocket Casts. Oh, and Tumblr. And Simplenote. And many others. That makes Mullenweg one of the most powerful CEOs in tech, and one of the most important voices in the debate over the future of the internet.

Keep Reading Show less
David Pierce

David Pierce ( @pierce) is Protocol's editorial director. Prior to joining Protocol, he was a columnist at The Wall Street Journal, a senior writer with Wired, and deputy editor at The Verge. He owns all the phones.

Entertainment

5 takeaways from Microsoft's Activision Blizzard acquisition

Microsoft just bought one of the world’s largest third-party game publishers. What now?

The nearly $70 billion acquisition gives Microsoft access to some of the most valuable brands in gaming.

Image: Microsoft Gaming

Just one week after Take-Two took the crown for biggest-ever industry acquisition, Microsoft strolled in Tuesday morning and dropped arguably the most monumental gaming news bombshell in years with its purchase of Activision Blizzard. The deal, at nearly $70 billion in all cash, dwarfs Take-Two’s purchase of Zynga, and it stands to reshape gaming as we know it.

The deal raises a number of pressing questions about the future of Activision Blizzard’s workplace culture issues, exclusivity in the game industry and whether such massive consolidation may trigger a regulatory response. None of these may be easily answered anytime soon, as the deal could take up to 18 months to close. But the question marks hanging over Activision Blizzard will loom large in the industry for the foreseeable future as Microsoft navigates its new role as one of the three largest game makers on the planet.

Keep Reading Show less
Nick Statt
Nick Statt is Protocol's video game reporter. Prior to joining Protocol, he was news editor at The Verge covering the gaming industry, mobile apps and antitrust out of San Francisco, in addition to managing coverage of Silicon Valley tech giants and startups. He now resides in Rochester, New York, home of the garbage plate and, completely coincidentally, the World Video Game Hall of Fame. He can be reached at nstatt@protocol.com.
Enterprise

Why AMD is waiting for China to approve its $35B bid for Xilinx

There’s another big chip deal in regulatory limbo. AMD’s $35 billion bid for Xilinx, which would transform its data-center business, is being held up by China.

AMD announced a $35 billion bid to acquire Xilinx more than a year ago.

Photographer: Chris Ratcliffe/Bloomberg via Getty Images

AMD has spent its entire corporate life as a second-class citizen to Intel. That’s just one reason why CEO Lisa Su seized an opportunity with a $35 billion stock deal to snap up programmable chipmaker Xilinx more than a year ago at one of Intel’s weakest moments in decades.

The full extent of a manufacturing stumble that delayed Intel's next-generation chips six months became apparent in 2020, to Su and AMD's considerable advantage. AMD’s share price soared as it became clear the longtime also-ran stood to gain significant market share, granting Su a considerably more valuable currency for acquisitions such as Xilinx, which makes chips for data center networking, cars, military use and satellites.

Keep Reading Show less
Max A. Cherney

Max A. Cherney is a Technology Reporter at Protocol covering the semiconductor industry. He has worked for Barron's magazine as a Technology Reporter, and its sister site MarketWatch. He is based in San Francisco.

Latest Stories
Bulletins