3 ms·
In this case, Meta was most definitely complicit for other reasons. - they started operating in a country but had no Myanmar-language human moderation, in a pl
by fault1 5y ago
In this case, Meta was most definitely complicit for other reasons.
- they started operating in a country but had no Myanmar-language human moderation, in a place where FB quickly became synonymous THE internet.
- the AI-powered content moderation failed hard on identifying hate speech partially because everything was written in Zawgyi, not Unicode.
It was way after the FB had a lot of eggs on their face that they issued public statements: https://about.fb.com/news/2018/11/myanmar-hria/ https://about.fb.com/news/2018/11/myanmar-hria/
They should have been much more proactive, but it seems like it was growth at all costs and ignore the rest.
- changoplatanero 5y agofacebook also doesn't have any content moderators in navajo or maya. should they block indigenous people from using their native languages on facebook to avoid harming them?
- skitout 5y agoInteresting question.... but it is a very different case than voluntary starting to operate in a country with voluntary no investment in an ok moderation in the main language spoken there
- p2p_astroturf 5y ago[dead]