Policy

Facebook’s Oversight Board upholds Trump ban — but for how long?

The board called on Facebook to further review its decision and return a new decision within six months.

President Trump in front of American flags

Former President Trump was suspended from Facebook following the Jan. 6 riot.

Photo: Brian Blanco/Getty Images

The Facebook Oversight Board voted against reinstating the account of former President Donald Trump Wednesday, upholding Facebook's decision to suspend him in the aftermath of the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

The board also instructed Facebook, however, to review the decision "to determine and justify a proportionate response and deliver a new decision within six months."

"It was not appropriate for Facebook to impose the indeterminate and standardless penalty of indefinite suspension," the decision reads. "Facebook's normal penalties include removing the violating content, imposing a time-bound period of suspension, or permanently disabling the page and account."

The board said it found that two of Trump's posts on Jan. 6 "severely violated" Facebook's rules. In one post, he expressed his love for the people storming the Capitol, saying they are "very special." In another, he called them "great patriots" and said he would "remember this day forever." Both comments, the board found, violate Facebook's rules against glorification of violence.

"At the time of Mr. Trump's posts, there was a clear, immediate risk of harm and his words of support for those involved in the riots legitimized their violent actions," the board wrote.

But the board chastised Facebook over its decision to issue an "indefinite" suspension, something the board said is not written into Facebook's rules. "In applying a vague, standardless penalty and then referring this case to the Board to resolve, Facebook seeks to avoid its responsibilities," the board wrote, echoing Facebook's critics, who have argued much the same.

In a call with reporters following the announcement, board chair Michael McConnell, who serves as Director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School, criticized Facebook for "apparently hoping that the board would do if it had not done."

"We are not cops, ranging over the realm of social media and solving the world's ills," McConnell said. "Our sole job is to hold this extremely powerful corporation, Facebook, accountable for making clear, consistent and transparent decisions, showing neither fear nor favor towards persons of political influence."

McConnell noted that there is a "substantial possibility" that the board is asked to revisit Facebook's decision six months from now.

"As we stated in January, we believe our decision was necessary and right, and we're pleased the board has recognized that the unprecedented circumstances justified the exceptional measure we took." Facebook VP of global affairs and communications Nick Clegg said in a written statement. "We will now consider the board's decision and determine an action that is clear and proportionate. In the meantime, Mr. Trump's accounts remain suspended."

The board in its decision included several recommendations for Facebook, urging more transparency in similar decisions. First, the board suggested, political speech from "highly influential users" should be rapidly escalated to expert, qualified, human content reviewers who are familiar with the language and context of the post. Those staffers should be "insulated from political and economic interference, as well as undue influence," the board suggests.

The board also calls on Facebook to make clear in its written policies how it makes these decisions, how it preserves and shares information, what its strikes and penalties procedures are, and include more information in its regular transparency reporting. Facebook should also "undertake a comprehensive review" of how its very existence and design may have contributed to the spread of electoral fraud misinformation, the board said: "This should be an open reflection on the design and policy choices that Facebook has made that may allow its platform to be abused."

Ultimately, the board emphasized that this decision was never just about Trump, but about all users who find themselves subject to the "ad-hockery" of Facebook's rules, as McConnell put it.

"Anyone who's concerned about Facebook's excessive concentration of power should welcome the Oversight Board clearly telling Facebook that they cannot invent new unwritten rules when it suits them," board chair Helle Thorning-Schmidt, former Danish Prime Minister, told reporters.

Still, the decision does have considerable implications for Trump. Since his sudden ouster from Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, Trump has lost access to arguably his most powerful weapon — social media. While he's still a regular on Fox News and has given high-profile speeches at Republican events, his visibility has waned significantly since leaving office. The board's decision to bar him from the platform, at least for the time being, calls into question the viability of Trump's ambitions to run for president in 2024 and opens the possibility that Facebook may take action against other global strongmen who violate its policies.

While some have dismissed the Oversight Board as a Facebook PR stunt, there's no mistaking the significance a permanent suspension could have on upcoming elections in the U.S. and abroad. If polls are to be believed, Trump is still the favorite to become the Republican nominee four years from now. Facebook, which has tried and failed to prove its political neutrality for most of its existence, could soon be in the position of prohibiting a leading candidate for the American presidency from using the platform, while the rest of the field gets access to Facebook's 3 billion users and hyper-targeted advertising tools. Even if Trump doesn't run, his continued deplatforming could diminish his ability to play kingmaker in Republican politics writ large.

The backlash to the board's decision — or lack thereof — was resounding. "Instead of addressing the core problems in its platform, the company exploited this fragile moment in our society in order to sell us the fiction of this oversight group. Don't buy it. Now, they're kicking the can down the road again," said Media Matters for America president Angelo Carusone.

"Unless Facebook permanently bans Trump immediately, we will be having this same dramatic sideshow in 6 months from now."

The decision to uphold the ban also feeds into the unsubstantiated narrative propagated in circles on the right that Facebook has been biased against conservatives all along. "Facebook's decision to uphold its ban on President Donald Trump is extremely disappointing. It's clear that Mark Zuckerberg views himself as the arbiter of free speech," Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn said in a statement.

But the board's choice hews closely to guidance from a wide cross-section of law professors, civil rights advocates and even some former Facebook employees who argued against letting Trump return to Facebook in comments submitted to the board. "There no doubt will be close calls under a policy that allows the deplatforming of political leaders in extreme circumstances," read one letter signed by a slew of academics, including Alex Stamos, Facebook's former head of security and current director of the Stanford Internet Observatory. "This was not one of them."

Now, the decision moves back to Facebook to determine whether or not they agree.

This story is developing and will be updated.

SKOREA-ENTERTAINMENT-GAMING-MICROSOFT-XBOX
A visitor plays a game using Microsoft's Xbox controller at a flagship store of SK Telecom in Seoul on November 10, 2020. (Photo by Jung Yeon-je / AFP) (Photo by JUNG YEON-JE/AFP via Getty Images)

On this episode of the Source Code podcast: Nick Statt joins the show to discuss Microsoft’s $68.7 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard, and what it means for the tech and game industries. Then, Issie Lapowsky talks about a big week in antitrust reform, and whether real progress is being made in the U.S. Finally, Hirsh Chitkara explains why AT&T, Verizon, the FAA and airlines have been fighting for months about 5G coverage.

For more on the topics in this episode:

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.

COVID-19 accelerated what many CEOs and CTOs have struggled to do for the past decade: It forced organizations to be agile and adjust quickly to change. For all the talk about digital transformation over the past decade, when push came to shove, many organizations realized they had made far less progress than they thought.

Now with the genie of rapid change out of the bottle, we will never go back to accepting slow and steady progress from our organizations. To survive and thrive in times of disruption, you need to build a resilient, adaptable business with systems and processes that will keep you nimble for years to come. An essential part of business agility is responding to change by quickly developing new applications and adapting old ones. IT faces an unprecedented demand for new applications. According to IDC, by 2023, more than 500 million digital applications and services will be developed and deployed — the same number of apps that were developed in the last 40 years.[1]

Keep Reading Show less
Denise Broady, CMO, Appian
Denise oversees the Marketing and Communications organization where she is responsible for accelerating the marketing strategy and brand recognition across the globe. Denise has over 24+ years of experience as a change agent scaling businesses from startups, turnarounds and complex software companies. Prior to Appian, Denise worked at SAP, WorkForce Software, TopTier and Clarkston Group. She is also a two-time published author of “GRC for Dummies” and “Driven to Perform.” Denise holds a double degree in marketing and production and operations from Virginia Tech.
Policy

Congress’ antitrust push has a hate speech problem

Sen. Klobuchar’s antitrust bill is supposed to promote competition. So why are advocates afraid it could also promote extremists?

The bill as written could make it a lot riskier for large tech companies to deplatform or demote companies that violate their rules.

Photo: Photo by Elizabeth Frantz-Pool/Getty Images

The antitrust bill that passed the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday and is now headed to the Senate floor is, at its core, an attempt to prevent the likes of Apple, Amazon and Google from boosting their own products and services on the marketplaces and platforms they own.

But upon closer inspection, some experts say, the bill as written could make it a lot riskier for large tech companies to deplatform or demote companies that violate their rules.

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.

Workplace

Ask a tech worker: How many of your colleagues have caught omicron?

Millions of workers called in sick in recent weeks. How is tech handling it?

A record number of Americans called in sick with COVID-19 in recent weeks. Even with high vaccination rates, tech companies aren’t immune.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

Welcome back to Ask a Tech Worker! For this recurring feature, I’ve been roaming downtown San Francisco at lunchtime to ask tech employees about how the workplace is changing. This week, I caught up with tech workers about what their companies are doing to avoid omicron outbreaks, and whether many of their colleagues had been out sick lately. Got an idea for a future topic? Email me.

Omicron stops for no one, it seems. Between Dec. 29 and Jan. 10, 8.8 million Americans missed work to either recover from COVID-19 or care for someone who was recovering, according to the Census Bureau. That number crushed the previous record of 6.6 million from last January, and tripled the numbers from early last month.

Keep Reading Show less
Allison Levitsky
Allison Levitsky is a reporter at Protocol covering workplace issues in tech. She previously covered big tech companies and the tech workforce for the Silicon Valley Business Journal. Allison grew up in the Bay Area and graduated from UC Berkeley.

The fast-growing paychecks of Big Tech’s biggest names

Tech giants had a huge pandemic, and their execs are getting paid.

TIm Cook received $82 million in stock awards on top of his $3 million salary as Apple's CEO.

Photo: Mario Tama/Getty Images

Tech leaders are making more than ever.

As tech giants thrive amid the pandemic, companies like Meta, Alphabet and Microsoft have continued to pay their leaders accordingly: Big Tech CEO pay is higher than ever. In the coming months, we’ll begin seeing a lot of companies release their executive compensation from the past year as fiscal 2022 begins.

Keep Reading Show less
Nat Rubio-Licht
Nat Rubio-Licht is a Los Angeles-based news writer at Protocol. They graduated from Syracuse University with a degree in newspaper and online journalism in May 2020. Prior to joining the team, they worked at the Los Angeles Business Journal as a technology and aerospace reporter.
Latest Stories
Bulletins