Meta’s oversight board has found that a Facebook video wrongfully suggesting that the US president, Joe Biden, is a paedophile does not violate the company’s current rules while deeming those rules “incoherent” and too narrowly focused on AI-generated content.

The board, which is funded by Meta – Facebook’s parent company – but run independently, took on the Biden video case in October in response to a user complaint about an altered seven-second video of the president. Mark Zuckerberg at a Senate judiciary committee hearing at the US Capitol in Washington DC

It ruled that Meta was right to leave the video up under its current policy, which bars misleadingly altered videos only if they were produced by artificial intelligence or if they make people appear to say words they never actually said.

But the ruling is the first to critique Meta’s policy on “manipulated media” amid rising concerns about the potential use of new AI technologies to sway elections this year.

It said the policy “is lacking in persuasive justification, is incoherent and confusing to users, and fails to clearly specify the harms it is seeking to prevent”. It suggested Meta update it to cover both audio and video content and to apply labels identifying it as manipulated regardless of whether AI was used.

  • thefartographer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    142
    ·
    8 months ago

    So what I’m hearing is that you can call anyone a pedophile on Facebook? Ok, every single employee and executive at Facebook are all pedophiles.

  • doctortofu@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    8 months ago

    So they’re saying that a very similar fake video calling Mark Zuckerberg a pedophile would be fine too, right?

  • IgnatiusJReilly@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Someone should create a series of AI deepfakes (or would they be called deepTRUTHS in this case) of Trump ‘telling the truth’. Having FACTUAL information coming from the horses mouth about his actual doings and intentions, would be a nice change.

    • Dizzy Devil Ducky@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      8 months ago

      I personally believe it’s more damaging to not go after people for those types of claims in one way or another, assuming you can go after them. A lie that spreads far and wide enough to enough ears will eventually become truth once the majority of the public tout it as truth.

      • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 months ago

        The Streisand Effect is also a concern, though. How many people will be aware of the video if he does nothing vs how many people will be aware of the video if he retaliates. We also know that a significant chunk of the population will believe he’s a pedophile regardless of what he does or how a court rules if they know about the video.

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          The thing about the Streisand effect is that Barbara Streisand actually exists, so the only way for her to succeed was for her to stay out of the media entirely. There also wasn’t a whole industry dedicated to making people think about her.

          With defamation against Biden, it’s foolish to think we can stop lies from spreading just by ignoring them, but what can be done is to debunk them.

      • andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Probably. But at the same time if you can shrug it of safely it may be better than being in news arguing that you are not a pedo.

  • Rooter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    8 months ago

    Meta allows and advertises nazi content like stonetoss.

    Yes, the same nazi stonetoss that got banned from Reddit.

  • doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    8 months ago

    So Meta’s own board of review thinks that this video should be violating a rule (or implied as much) but the rules are so incompetently written that it isn’t…

  • Furbag@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    8 months ago

    Friendly reminder to everyone reading that Donald Trump was a known associate of Jeffery Epstein. There are unaltered photographs to prove it.

    This is just more right wing projection.

  • LocoOhNo@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 months ago

    The number of comments I’ve reported to Facebook that are blatant racist/Nazi diatribes is insane, especially when you consider that Facebook ALWAYS says it doesn’t go against their “Community Standards.”

    Looks like they don’t have any standards.

  • shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    8 months ago

    How about this for a headline?

    Meta’s Oversight Board Finds Company Policy on False Content Inadequate, Suggests Updates

    Nah. Won’t get you guys up in arms. “Engaged” as Zuckerberg might say.

    • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      Facebook Takes Twenty Years To Realize Altering Videos To Make Presidents Look Like Pedophiles Is Undesirable

      (They are a small bootstrapped startup, and some decisions are really tricky)

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    But the ruling is the first to critique Meta’s policy on “manipulated media” amid rising concerns about the potential use of new AI technologies to sway elections this year.

    It said the policy “is lacking in persuasive justification, is incoherent and confusing to users, and fails to clearly specify the harms it is seeking to prevent”.

    It suggested Meta update it to cover both audio and video content and to apply labels identifying it as manipulated regardless of whether AI was used.

    Meta, which also owns Instagram and WhatsApp, informed the board in the course of the review that it was planning to update the policy “to respond to the evolution of new and increasingly realistic AI”, according to the ruling.

    The clip on Facebook manipulated real footage of Biden exchanging “I Voted” stickers with his granddaughter during the 2022 US midterm elections and kissing her on the cheek.

    Enforcement, it added, should consist of applying labels to the content rather than Meta’s current approach of removing the posts from its platforms.


    The original article contains 357 words, the summary contains 172 words. Saved 52%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!