Meta’s Oversight Board says account bans lack due process, transparency
Meta’s Oversight Board says account bans lack due process, transparency
Meta 监督委员会：账号封禁缺乏正当程序与透明度
Meta’s Oversight Board, the independent governing body that makes policy recommendations to the tech company, said Thursday that Meta’s account deactivations lack due process, violations are doled out without clarity, and there’s little customer support for appeals. Meta 监督委员会（Meta 的独立管理机构，负责向该公司提供政策建议）周四表示，Meta 的账号停用流程缺乏正当程序，违规处罚缺乏明确性，且在申诉方面几乎没有客户支持。
The board, which recently received increased funding to continue its work through 2028, launched the investigation into Meta’s account violations policy earlier this year to review a case involving threats of violence against a journalist. The board agreed that Meta was right to permanently disable the account due to the severity of the threats. 该委员会近期获得了额外资金，以支持其工作持续至 2028 年。今年早些时候，委员会针对 Meta 的账号违规政策展开了调查，旨在审查一起涉及针对某记者暴力威胁的案件。委员会认同 Meta 因威胁的严重性而永久停用该账号的做法是正确的。
However, in looking into the matter, the board found what it described as “systemic human rights concerns,” and a “lack of transparency and consistency” when it came to Meta’s two-system approach to disabling accounts. That’s a reference to the two different ways accounts can be actioned against: one that involves strikes, some that can be severe, and another for “egregious” violations that merit permanently disabling an account. The board said the difference between what leads to one type of violation or the other isn’t clear or well-documented. 然而，在调查过程中，委员会发现了其所称的“系统性人权问题”，并指出 Meta 在停用账号的“双重系统”处理方式上存在“透明度和一致性缺失”。这指的是针对账号采取行动的两种不同方式：一种涉及违规记录（其中一些可能很严重），另一种则针对足以导致永久封号的“恶劣”违规行为。委员会表示，导致这两种不同违规类型之间的界限并不明确，也缺乏完善的记录。
The board also called out the social media giant for charging users for Meta Verified access, which is supposed to include “24/7 access to email or chat agent support,” but failing to provide users with disabled accounts any sort of “meaningful assistance.” 委员会还批评了这家社交媒体巨头，指出其向用户收取“Meta 认证”（Meta Verified）费用，该服务本应包含“全天候邮件或聊天人工支持”，但却未能为账号被停用的用户提供任何形式的“有效协助”。
Meta users across Facebook, Instagram, and other Meta apps have dealt with this problem for years. As Meta’s moderation systems became more automated over the years, there has been little recourse when they make mistakes to get any sort of help from the company. This has been devastating to users who have lost their personal accounts, or even those belonging to their business, over false accusations. Some have even filed lawsuits over the matter or are in the process of doing so. 多年来，Facebook、Instagram 及其他 Meta 应用的用户一直深受此问题困扰。随着 Meta 的审核系统日益自动化，当系统出错时，用户几乎没有渠道从公司获得任何帮助。对于那些因错误指控而失去个人账号甚至商业账号的用户来说，这造成了毁灭性的打击。一些用户甚至已就此事提起诉讼，或正在准备诉讼。
The board took up the matter of permanent bans in a landmark case after a wave of recent bans that affected Facebook and Instagram. 在近期一波影响 Facebook 和 Instagram 的封号潮之后，委员会在一项里程碑式的案件中处理了永久封禁的问题。
After covering the bans, TechCrunch received a constant stream of reports from impacted users, begging us to bring their cases to Meta’s attention. For instance, retired LA County firefighter and paramedic Richard Pauwels, who was building a wellness brand on Meta’s platforms, claimed his personal account was banned without any specific post being identified and without human review. 在报道了这些封禁事件后，TechCrunch 收到了大量受影响用户的反馈，他们恳求我们引起 Meta 对其案件的关注。例如，已退休的洛杉矶县消防员兼护理人员 Richard Pauwels 表示，他正在 Meta 平台上建立一个健康品牌，但他的个人账号在没有明确指出具体违规帖文且未经人工审核的情况下被封禁。
Automated alleged child sexual exploitation (CSE) violations are another common occurrence leading to bans, which are devastating to innocent parties. For instance, a PR professional reached out to us, asking to remain anonymous because their account was banned for false accusations of CSE, despite no content being cited in their ban and no new posts from them in weeks. Meta’s allegation was “evil and vile,” they told us, and filed a case with the Oversight Board. 自动化的“涉嫌儿童性剥削”（CSE）违规判定是导致封号的另一个常见原因，这对无辜者来说是毁灭性的。例如，一位公关专业人士联系我们并要求匿名，因为他们的账号因被错误指控涉及 CSE 而被封禁，尽管封禁通知中未引用任何内容，且他们数周内未发布任何新帖。他们告诉我们，Meta 的指控“邪恶且卑劣”，并已向监督委员会提交了申诉。
Another person, Manomi Jayakody, said their account was also banned for CSE, again without any specific content, action, or violation being flagged. “I fully understand and support the critical importance of CSE enforcement and online safety. However, when accounts are flagged under such serious categories without due process, transparency, or consistent human oversight … the consequences for innocent users are severe,” they wrote to TechCrunch and other reporters in an email. “In my case, I received no explanation, no evidence, and no opportunity to clarify or correct any alleged issue.” 另一位用户 Manomi Jayakody 表示，他们的账号也因 CSE 被封，同样没有被标记任何具体内容、行为或违规。他们在给 TechCrunch 和其他记者的邮件中写道：“我完全理解并支持 CSE 执法和网络安全的重要性。然而，当账号在没有正当程序、透明度或持续人工监督的情况下被标记为如此严重的类别时……对无辜用户造成的后果是严重的。就我而言，我没有收到任何解释、证据，也没有机会澄清或纠正任何所谓的违规问题。”
In another example, a bird rescue operation, of all things, was banned for CSE material. “It’s an account about our rescue pigeons. It has over 60K followers, and we regularly use that account to contact other volunteers who rescue birds and find adopters or medical assistance for all the birds that we help,” they pleaded in an email to TechCrunch. 另一个例子是，一个鸟类救援组织竟然也因“CSE 内容”被封号。他们在给 TechCrunch 的邮件中恳求道：“这是一个关于我们救援鸽子的账号。它拥有超过 6 万名粉丝，我们经常使用该账号联系其他鸟类救援志愿者，并为我们救助的所有鸟类寻找领养人或医疗援助。”
Another content creator, Albert Olgaard, with 325,000 Instagram followers, said his Meta accounts for his business were shut down overnight for allegations of “fraud,” with no citations of what he did wrong. When he tried to appeal, a message on the screen stated, “You cannot request another review of this decision.” The move financially impacted him, he said. 另一位拥有 32.5 万 Instagram 粉丝的内容创作者 Albert Olgaard 表示，他用于商业的 Meta 账号在一夜之间因“欺诈”指控被关闭，且未说明他有何过错。当他尝试申诉时，屏幕上显示：“您无法再次请求对此决定进行审查。”他表示，此举对他造成了经济损失。
Designer Alex Smola also woke up one day to find his account permanently disabled. “The account was tied to legitimate business activity, including page access, client communication, marketing, advertising, and lead generation,” Smola wrote in an email to TechCrunch. “Since the deletion, I have suffered ongoing business disruption, reputational harm, and significant stress, while being unable to obtain any meaningful human review through Meta’s support channels.” 设计师 Alex Smola 某天醒来发现自己的账号被永久停用。“该账号与合法的商业活动挂钩，包括页面访问、客户沟通、营销、广告和潜在客户开发，”Smola 在给 TechCrunch 的邮件中写道。“自删除以来，我遭受了持续的业务中断、声誉损害和巨大的压力，同时无法通过 Meta 的支持渠道获得任何有效的人工审核。”
That mirrors many other complaints TechCrunch fielded from Meta Verified subscribers who said they didn’t get the support they paid for through the subscription. One person even said the Meta agent ended their chat when they referenced the EU regulation, GDPR. These are just a smattering of the reports we’ve received since covering the topic, and the inbound emails continue from people desperate for help. 这反映了 TechCrunch 从“Meta 认证”订阅用户那里收到的许多其他投诉，他们表示自己并未获得订阅所承诺的支持。甚至有人说，当他们提到欧盟法规《通用数据保护条例》（GDPR）时，Meta 客服直接结束了对话。这些只是我们报道该话题以来收到的部分报告，寻求帮助的邮件仍在源源不断地涌入。
Meta’s Board highlights lack of due process
Meta 监督委员会强调缺乏正当程序
As illustrated by these examples and others, there are due process concerns around account bans. As a result, the board is recommending that Meta offer users a dashboard where they can easily review their account stats, past violations, and information on appeal options, along with clear notifications about the violations at the time they are imposed. These warnings or violation reports should include the time they were imposed, the specific rule that was violated, the sanction imposed, and appeal options. Additionally, the board says Meta should provide users with information on the role AI plays in content review and the imposition of warnings or penalties, among other things. 正如这些例子所展示的那样，账号封禁存在正当程序方面的担忧。因此，委员会建议 Meta 为用户提供一个仪表板，方便他们查看账号状态、过往违规记录以及申诉选项信息，并在违规发生时提供清晰的通知。这些警告或违规报告应包含处罚时间、违反的具体规则、实施的制裁以及申诉途径。此外，委员会表示，Meta 还应向用户提供有关人工智能在内容审核以及警告或处罚实施中所扮演角色的信息。
In response to the board’s report, Meta shared 针对委员会的报告，Meta 分享了……