ＦＢの「最高裁判事」２０人発表　コンテンツ判断担う

【サンフランシスコＡＦＰ＝時事】交流サイト（SNS）最大手の米フェイスブックは6日、フェイスブックとインスタグラム上でのコンテンツの許可・削除に関する決定権を持つ「最高裁判所」としての機能を持つ独立監視委員会のメンバー20人を発表した。（写真はフェイスブックのロゴ）
　監視委員会は、これまで検閲や偽情報、表現の自由をめぐる論争を引き起こしてきたような投稿についての最終決定を下すことになる。
　フェイスブックの公共方針責任者、ブレント・ハリス氏は、監視委員会の創設について、「フェイスブックで最も難易度の高いコンテンツ判断をする際の方法の根本的変化」に向けた第一歩となると説明した。
　６日に発表された委員２０人には法学者、人権活動家、ジャーナリストのほか、ノーベル平和賞受賞者のタワックル・カルマン氏、デンマークのヘレ・トーニングシュミット元首相が含まれ、出身国も多様な顔触れとなっている。
　委員は今後４０人に増員される予定。新型コロナウイルスのパンデミック（世界的な大流行）により集会や渡航が制限されていることから、委員会の審理開始のめどは立っていない。【翻訳編集ＡＦＰＢＢＮｅｗｓ】
〔ＡＦＰ＝時事〕（2020/05/07-12:17）

Facebook on Wednesday announced the first members of its independent supreme court empowered to make binding decisions about what content should be allowed or removed at the social network and Instagram.
The oversight board is to make final decisions regarding the kinds of posts known to embroil Facebook in controversy about censorship, misinformation or free speech.
Facebook public policy director Brent Harris described creation of the board as the beginning of a fundamental change in the way some of the most difficult content decisions on Facebook will be made.
The 20 members of the panel announced Wednesday come from various countries and include jurists, human rights activists, journalists, a Nobel peace laureate and a former Danish prime minister.
This is a group that has a diverse set of insights, backgrounds, and beliefs but share a deep commitment to advancing human rights and freedom of expression, board director Thomas Hughes said during a phone briefing.
The board is to be expanded to 40 members. It remained unclear when the board would start hearing cases due to restrictions on gathering or traveling caused by the deadly coronavirus pandemic.
Board members have met virtually and training has started, according to Hughes.
The board was first proposed by Facebook co-founder and chief Mark Zuckerberg in 2018, and the California-based internet giant has set up a foundation to fund it operating as an independent entity, Harris said.
Today, the impact of social media on people's lives is hard to grasp. This can often be positive, a blog post from the board said.
As the world lives through a global health crisis, social media has become a lifeline for helping people and communities to stay connected. At the same time, we know that social media can spread speech that is hateful, harmful and deceitful. In recent years, the question of what content should stay up or come down, and who should decide this, has become increasingly urgent for society.
Hughes said he was open to the board serving as an arbiter of disputes for other social media firms such as Twitter but that, for now, the focus is on filling its roster and getting into action on cases about Facebook or Instagram posts.
- Not the 'internet police' -
Facebook will implement the board's decisions, unless they violate law, and respond to guidance on policies, according to Harris.
The board said it will decide whether disputed posts comply with Facebook and Instagram policies and values as well as freedom of expression within the framework of international norms of human rights regardless of the social network's corporate interests.
Facebook cannot remove members or staff of the board, which is supported by a $130 million irrevocable trust fund.
Users of Facebook or Instagram, as well as the social network itself, will be able to refer content removal decisions to the board.
For the first time, an independent body will make final and binding decisions on what stays up and what is removed, said board co-chair Helle Thorning-Schmidt, a former prime minister of Denmark.
This is a big deal; we are basically building a new model for platform governance.
Board co-chair Michael McConnell, a university law professor and former US federal judge, said the expected volume of cases would make it impossible to consider them all.
Instead, like the US Supreme Court, the board will prioritize content removal cases that can set precedents for how Facebook should handle similar material, according to McConnell.
We are going to have to select maybe a few flowers, or maybe they are weeds, from a field of possibilities, McConnell said.
The board plans to first focus on cases affecting large numbers of users; second on cases look to have major effect on public discourse, and then those that effect policy at the platform and will guide its decisions in a wide range of matters, he explained.
We are not the internet police, McConnell said.
Don't think of us as a fast action team that is going to swoop in. Our job is to consider appeals, provide an after-the-fact, deliberative second look.