spinofflive
A protester wearing a model head of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg outside the UK inquiry in November 2018. (Photo by Jack Taylor/Getty Images)
A protester wearing a model head of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg outside the UK inquiry in November 2018. (Photo by Jack Taylor/Getty Images)

SocietyMarch 19, 2019

Mark Zuckerberg, four days on, your silence on Christchurch is deafening

Editor-at-large
A protester wearing a model head of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg outside the UK inquiry in November 2018. (Photo by Jack Taylor/Getty Images)
A protester wearing a model head of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg outside the UK inquiry in November 2018. (Photo by Jack Taylor/Getty Images)

In New Zealand we’re waiting to see if the all-powerful Facebook boss means what he says about ‘moral responsibility’, writes Toby Manhire

More than four days have passed since the world’s weakest man launched an assault that took the lives of 50 people at prayer in Christchurch. He did it with a camera stuck to his head, livestreaming it on Facebook, the world’s most powerful media company. It was taken down after police sounded the alarm. But already it had spread through Twitter – where links to the video sit untroubled still despite repeated reports. Already it had spread across Google’s YouTube platform, where the most ghoulish appetites on the planet are daily sated for profit.

But it was Facebook that broadcast it live. And for all that the world’s first genuinely megalithic media company might protest that it worked hard to scrub out this tech-dystopian freak show, the video continues to be shared on the platform today.

More than four days on, then, the $64 billion question (that’s how much Mr Zuckerberg is reportedly worth) is this: what do you have to say for yourself, Mark? Seems you’re busy, and instead have dispatched an underling to do the thoughts-and-prayers and “committed to countering hate speech and the threat of terrorism online”. Sitting here in New Zealand, that’s nowhere near good enough.

You’ve been silent, just as you were when you snubbed representatives of nine countries seeking answers on Facebook’s hazardous impact on democracy. They empty-chaired you. I hope, Mark, that you’re called to answer to the impending inquiry into what happened in Christchurch, to account for Facebook’s role as a propaganda conduit and distribution mechanism for terrorism in New Zealand. Will we have to empty-chair you, too?

Meanwhile the great Silicon Valley ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ scrolls on. Hey, come on, they say, we’re doing everything we can to tune the machines to cut out the evil stuff! The AI is nearly there! Keep the faith! Thanks all the same, but nah. Until you can sort out a system to forestall the livestreaming of mass murder, switch it off. Yes, any solution may involve employing a lot of actual human beings to make judgments. And that would be very expensive, it’s true. Also true: for the final three months of 2018 – that’s one quarter of a year – Facebook posted a profit of US $6.9 billion.

Maybe it will take a real and present threat to those billions to get your full attention. It’s beginning, and it’s fired by a visceral anger. The bosses of New Zealand’s big telecoms companies have taken you and Twitter and Google to task today. Businesses across the country, and beyond, are pulling their advertising. A groundswell of users have begun closing their accounts in disgust. The world is watching. Something is happening.

For Facebook, Google, Twitter and the rest, the Ted-talk techbro “disruptive” bullshit looks every day more like cynical camouflage for lawlessness and avarice. Facebook is not some plucky upstart, but the most powerful publisher the world has ever known, wielding an unprecedented power and influence around the world. You might like to masquerade in a hoodie and jeans, but we know who you are: you’re stupidly powerful. You’re the chair and CEO of this giant. It’s absurd.

Your chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg, has repeatedly gushed over our prime minister. Jacinda Ardern is a shining example to women, a “prodigy”. “She’s not just leading a country,” said Sandberg. “She’s changing the game.” There was little doubt about that then; Ardern’s response to the catastrophe that has befallen New Zealand’s Muslim community, the city of Christchurch, and New Zealand as a whole, has left no doubt. Up to and including Ardern’s remarks about the role of social media delivered in parliament today – game-changing remarks which surely chilled the air, even at Facebook’s adolescently named address, 1 Hacker Way.

“There is no question that ideas and language of division and hate have existed for decades, but their form of distribution, the tools of organisation, they are new,” she said.

More Reading

“We cannot simply sit back and accept that these platforms just exist and that what is said on them is not the responsibility of the place where they are published. They are the publisher. Not just the postman. There cannot be a case of all-profit, no-responsibility.”

Something is definitely happening.

You’ve acknowledged before, Mark Zuckerberg, such as in your emotional letter to your newborn daughter, that you have a “moral responsibility”. Right now you’ve said nothing. Four days on and counting, in New Zealand we’re waiting to see if you have any meaningful sense of moral responsibility at all.

Keep going!
tobs (7)

SocietyMarch 19, 2019

‘Be part of the solution’: NZ internet bosses demands answers from Facebook, Twitter and Google

tobs (7)

An open letter from the CEOs of Spark, Vodafone and 2degrees to the global CEOs of Facebook, Twitter and Google

To:
Mark Zuckerberg, Chairman and CEO, Facebook
Jack Dorsey, CEO, Twitter
Sundar Pichai, CEO, Google

A call from the companies providing internet access for the great majority of New Zealanders, to the companies with the greatest influence over social media content

You may be aware that on the afternoon of Friday 15 March, three of New Zealand’s largest broadband providers, Vodafone NZ, Spark and 2degrees, took the unprecedented step to jointly identify and suspend access to web sites that were hosting video footage taken by the gunman related to the horrific terrorism incident in Christchurch.

As key industry players, we believed this extraordinary step was the right thing to do in such extreme and tragic circumstances. Other New Zealand broadband providers have also taken steps to restrict availability of this content, although they may be taking a different approach technically.

We also accept it is impossible as internet service providers to prevent completely access to this material. But hopefully we have made it more difficult for this content to be viewed and shared – reducing the risk our customers may inadvertently be exposed to it and limiting the publicity the gunman was clearly seeking.

We acknowledge that in some circumstances access to legitimate content may have been prevented, and that this raises questions about censorship. For that we apologise to our customers. This is all the more reason why an urgent and broader discussion is required.

Internet service providers are the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff, with blunt tools involving the blocking of sites after the fact. The greatest challenge is how to prevent this sort of material being uploaded and shared on social media platforms and forums.

We call on Facebook, Twitter and Google, whose platforms carry so much content, to be a part of an urgent discussion at an industry and New Zealand Government level on an enduring solution to this issue.

We appreciate this is a global issue, however the discussion must start somewhere. We must find the right balance between internet freedom and the need to protect New Zealanders, especially the young and vulnerable, from harmful content. Social media companies and hosting platforms that enable the sharing of user generated content with the public have a legal duty of care to protect their users and wider society by preventing the uploading and sharing of content such as this video.

Although we recognise the speed with which social network companies sought to remove Friday’s video once they were made aware of it, this was still a response to material that was rapidly spreading globally and should never have been made available online. We believe society has the right to expect companies such as yours to take more responsibility for the content on their platforms.

Content sharing platforms have a duty of care to proactively monitor for harmful content, act expeditiously to remove content which is flagged to them as illegal and ensure that such material – once identified – cannot be re-uploaded.

Technology can be a powerful force for good. The very same platforms that were used to share the video were also used to mobilise outpourings of support. But more needs to be done to prevent horrific content being uploaded. Already there are AI techniques that we believe can be used to identify content such as this video, in the same way that copyright infringements can be identified. These must be prioritised as a matter of urgency.

For the most serious types of content, such as terrorist content, more onerous requirements should apply, such as proposed in Europe, including take down within a specified period, proactive measures and fines for failure to do so. Consumers have the right to be protected whether using services funded by money or data.

Now is the time for this conversation to be had, and we call on all of you to join us at the table and be part of the solution.

 

Society