The Wall Street Journal explains (behind the wall of payments) how it has had an arrangement in place for years to allow its VIP clients, such as politicians and public figures, to break Facebook’s strict rules.
If and when any of these VIP accounts violate Facebook’s rules, Facebook must respond to it.
Facebook created the Xcheck arrangement for this purpose. The Xcheck arrangement is named after the English words “cross check”. Externally, it does just that, that is, it cross-checks the violations of high-profile characters so as not to accidentally do anything that would become an afterthought.
In practice, this is handled by sending a report on the VIP account breach to the group dealing with these cases separately.
Where Facebook Moderators are typically an outsourced workforce, the Xcheck group consists entirely of Facebook’s own employees.
Be that as it may, according to the WSJ, most of these forwarded notifications are completely left unprocessed. This way, Facebook avoids protecting IP users from future public relations problems.
Like Engadget to sum up, the Facebook arrangement allows public figures, politicians and other important parties to freely break Facebook’s rules without any sanctions.
A good example of this is the Brazilian football star Neymar outrageous behavior. The woman accused Neymar of coercing into a sexual act. Neymar’s reaction was to disgrace her prosecutor by uploading a bunch of nude pictures of the woman to Facebook.
From such a trick, any ordinary user would immediately get a shoe from Facebook, as it blatantly violates Facebook’s rules. Neymar received no punishment for his conduct.
Outsourced Moderators could only escalate the problem through Xcheck to Facebook’s own team, which reacted rather slowly: the tapping images uploaded by Neymar had time to be viewed nearly 60 million times before they were finally removed.
The case is by no means the only one of its kind. According to a WSJ study, content that violated Facebook’s own rules could be viewed in peace 16 billion times in 2020 alone.
According to the WSJ, Facebook is also not transparent about Xcheck’s operations, despite the company’s promise to do so. For example, when Facebook’s Board of Supervisors demanded an explanation from Facebook as to why it would not use Xcheck when dealing with the President Donald Trumpin user account closure, the company said Xcheckin rarely influenced its decisions, and that it was not possible to share data on the subject.
Facebook has commented on the WSJ article, saying it is based on old information and that the company has been working to improve its cross-checking arrangement.
“Ultimately, at the heart of this story is Facebook’s own conclusion that the arrangement needs to be improved. We know that our control mechanism is not perfect and choices have to be made between speed and accuracy, ”said a Facebook spokesman Andy Stone On Twitter.
Source: Tivi by www.tivi.fi.
*The article has been translated based on the content of Tivi by www.tivi.fi. If there is any problem regarding the content, copyright, please leave a report below the article. We will try to process as quickly as possible to protect the rights of the author. Thank you very much!
*We just want readers to access information more quickly and easily with other multilingual content, instead of information only available in a certain language.
*We always respect the copyright of the content of the author and always include the original link of the source article.If the author disagrees, just leave the report below the article, the article will be edited or deleted at the request of the author. Thanks very much! Best regards!