Connect with us

Social Media

Kenya: Meta Sued for $1.6 Billion USD for Fuelling Ethiopia Ethnic Violence

Published

on

Facebook Meta

By Amnesty International 

Meta must reform its business practices to ensure Facebook’s algorithms do not amplify hatred and fuel ethnic conflict, Amnesty International said today in the wake of a landmark legal action against Meta submitted in Kenya’s High Court.

The legal action claims that Meta promoted speech that led to ethnic violence and killings in Ethiopia by utilizing an algorithm that prioritizes and recommends hateful and violent content on Facebook. The petitioners seek to stop Facebook’s algorithms from recommending such content to Facebook users and compel Meta to create a 200 billion ($1.6 billion USD) victims’ fund. Amnesty International joins six other human rights and legal organizations as interested parties in the case.

“The spread of dangerous content on Facebook lies at the heart of Meta’s pursuit of profit, as its systems are designed to keep people engaged. This legal action is a significant step in holding Meta to account for its harmful business model,” said Flavia Mwangovya, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director of East Africa, Horn, and Great Lakes Region.

One of Amnesty’s staff members in the region was targeted as a result of posts on the social media platform.

“In Ethiopia, the people rely on social media for news and information. Because of the hate and disinformation on Facebook, human rights defenders have also become targets of threats and vitriol.    I saw first-hand how the dynamics on Facebook harmed my own human rights work and hope this case will redress the imbalance,” said Fisseha Tekle, legal advisor at Amnesty International.

Fisseha Tekle is one of the petitioners bringing the case, after being subjected to a stream of hateful posts on Facebook for his work exposing human rights violations in Ethiopia. An Ethiopian national, he now lives in Kenya, fears for his life and dare not return to Ethiopia to see his family because of the vitriol directed at him on Facebook.

Fatal failings

The legal action is also being brought by Abraham Meareg, the son of Meareg Amare, a University Professor at Bahir Dar University in northern Ethiopia, who was hunted down and killed in November 2021, weeks after posts inciting hatred and violence against him spread on Facebook. The case claims that Facebook only removed the hateful posts eight days after Professor Meareg’s killing, more than three weeks after his family had first alerted the company.

The Court has been informed that Abraham Meareg fears for his safety and is seeking asylum in the United States. His mother who fled to Addis Ababa is severely traumatized and screams every night in her sleep after witnessing her husband’s killing. The family had their home in Bahir Dar seized by regional police.

The harmful posts targeting Meareg Amare and Fisseha Tekle were not isolated cases.  The legal action alleges Facebook is awash with hateful, inciteful and dangerous posts in the context of the Ethiopia conflict.

Meta uses engagement-based algorithmic systems to power Facebook’s news feed, ranking, recommendations and groups features, shaping what is seen on the platform. Meta profits when Facebook users stay on the platform as long as possible, by selling more targeted advertising.

The display of inflammatory content – including that which advocates hatred, constituting incitement to violence, hostility and discrimination – is an effective way of keeping people on the platform longer. As such, the promotion and amplification of this type of content is key to the surveillance-based business model of Facebook.

Internal studies dating back to 2012 indicated that Meta knew its algorithms could result in serious real-world harms. In 2016, Meta’s own research clearly acknowledged that “our recommendation systems grow the problem” of extremism.

In September 2022, Amnesty International documented how Meta’s algorithms proactively amplified and promoted content which incited violence, hatred, and discrimination against the Rohingya in Myanmar and substantially increasing the risk of an outbreak of mass violence.

“From Ethiopia to Myanmar, Meta knew or should have known that its algorithmic systems were fuelling the spread of harmful content leading to serious real-world harms,” said Flavia Mwangovya.

“Meta has shown itself incapable to act to stem this tsunami of hate. Governments need to step up and enforce effective legislation to rein in the surveillance-based business models of tech companies.”

Deadly double standards

The legal action also claims that there is a disparity in Meta’s approach in crisis situations in Africa compared to elsewhere in the world, particularly North America. The company has the capability to implement special adjustments to its algorithms to quickly remove inflammatory content during a crisis. But despite being deployed elsewhere in the world, according to the petitioners none of these adjustments were made during the conflict in Ethiopia, ensuring harmful content continued to proliferate.

Internal Meta documents disclosed by whistle-blower Frances Haugen, known as the Facebook Papers, showed that the US $300 billion company also did not have sufficient content moderators who speak local languages. A report by Meta’s Oversight Board also raised concerns that Meta had not invested sufficient resources in moderating content in languages other than English.

“Meta has failed to adequately invest in content moderation in the Global South, meaning that the spread of hate, violence, and discrimination disproportionally impacts the most marginalized and oppressed communities across the world, and particularly in the Global South.”

Is the CEO/Founder of Investors King Limited. A proven foreign exchange research analyst and a published author on Yahoo Finance, Businessinsider, Nasdaq, Entrepreneur.com, Investorplace, and many more. He has over two decades of experience in global financial markets.

Continue Reading
Comments

Social Media

TikTok Vows Legal Battle Amid Threat of US Ban

Published

on

TikTok 1

As the specter of a US ban looms large over TikTok, the popular social media platform has declared its intention to wage a legal battle against potential legislation that could force its Chinese-owned parent company, ByteDance Ltd., to divest its ownership stake in the app.

In what amounts to a fight for its very existence in one of its most crucial markets, TikTok is gearing up for a high-stakes showdown in the courts.

The alarm bells were sounded within TikTok’s ranks as Michael Beckerman, the company’s head of public policy for the Americas, issued a rallying cry to its US staff.

In a memo obtained by Bloomberg News, Beckerman characterized the proposed legislation as an “unprecedented deal” brokered between Republican Speaker and President Biden, signaling TikTok’s readiness to challenge it legally once signed into law.

“This is an unprecedented deal worked out between the Republican Speaker and President Biden,” Beckerman stated in the memo. “At the stage that the bill is signed, we will move to the courts for a legal challenge.”

The urgency of TikTok’s response stems from recent developments in the US Congress, where lawmakers have fast-tracked legislation mandating ByteDance’s divestment from TikTok.

The bill, intricately linked to a vital aid package for Ukraine and Israel, has garnered significant bipartisan support and is expected to swiftly pass through the Senate before landing on President Biden’s desk.

Beckerman minced no words in his critique of the proposed legislation, labeling it a “clear violation” of TikTok users’ First Amendment rights and warning of “devastating consequences” for the millions of small businesses that rely on the platform for their livelihoods.

TikTok’s defiant stance reflects the gravity of the situation facing the tech giant, which has spent years grappling with concerns from US officials regarding potential national security risks associated with its Chinese ownership.

Despite extensive lobbying efforts led by TikTok CEO Shou Chew to allay these fears, the company now finds itself at a critical juncture, where legal action appears to be its last line of defense.

ByteDance, TikTok’s Beijing-based parent company, has also signaled its intent to challenge any US ban in court, signaling a united front in the face of mounting pressure.

However, navigating the legal landscape will not be without its challenges, as ByteDance must contend with both US legislative measures and potential obstacles posed by the Chinese government, which has reiterated its opposition to a forced sale of TikTok.

As TikTok prepares to embark on what promises to be a protracted legal battle, the outcome remains uncertain.

For the millions of users and businesses that call TikTok home, the stakes have never been higher, as the platform fights to preserve its presence in the fiercely competitive landscape of social media.

Continue Reading

Social Media

Trump Media & Tech Group Plummets, Wiping Out $2.8 Billion in Value

Published

on

Trump Truth Media-Investors King

Trump Media & Technology Group Corp., the social media predominantly owned by former U.S. President Donald Trump, has lost $2.8 billion in market value in the last few days.

The tumultuous downturn comes as a wave of retail traders who once fervently boosted the stock have begun to offload their holdings.

The company, which encompasses the Truth Social platform, has seen its stock plummet by 36% since its closing high on March 26.

This nosedive not only erased the gains achieved in the aftermath of its merger with Digital World Acquisition Corp., but it also pushed the stock below its pre-merger trading levels.

Initially, Trump Media enjoyed a meteoric rise in its early days as a publicly traded entity following the merger with DWAC, the blank-check company facilitating the deal.

However, the allure of the stock among individual investors, who saw it as a means to express support for the former president’s potential 2024 reelection bid, has waned significantly.

As the stock continues its downward spiral, the once-projected paper windfall for Donald Trump himself has also dwindled.

Trump’s anticipated gains from the venture have plummeted by approximately $1.6 billion, leaving him with an estimated $2.9 billion in paper wealth.

However, realization of this wealth remains contingent upon a six-month lock-up agreement, delaying Trump’s ability to sell shares.

The timing of Trump Media’s downfall coincides with a flurry of legal troubles facing the former president. With just a week until the commencement of his first criminal trial in Manhattan, Trump faces charges related to falsifying business records in connection with hush money payments to a pornographic actress prior to the 2016 election.

Also, Trump is slated to undergo deposition in a civil lawsuit filed against him and Trump Media by two co-founders alleging share dilution prior to the merger.

Despite the substantial loss in value, Trump Media retains a market capitalization of approximately $5 billion, underscoring the paradoxical valuation dynamics in the current market environment.

The company’s meager revenue of $4.1 million in the preceding year contrasts sharply with its lofty market capitalization, raising concerns about the sustainability of its valuation.

The dramatic downturn of Trump Media & Technology Group mirrors the volatile trajectory of past meme stocks like GameStop Corp. and underscores the inherent risks associated with companies emerging from SPAC mergers.

As the company grapples with its dwindling valuation and mounting legal challenges, the future of Truth Social and its associated ventures remains uncertain in the ever-shifting landscape of the digital realm.

Continue Reading

Social Media

TikTok Faces Existential Threat as US House Votes Overwhelmingly to Ban Unless Sold

Published

on

tiktok valuation

The US House of Representatives has voted overwhelmingly to ban TikTok unless its Chinese owner, ByteDance Ltd., sells the video-sharing app.

The measure, passed by a vote of 352 to 65, marks a significant escalation in the ongoing scrutiny of TikTok, which has come under fire over concerns about national security and data privacy.

The bill, if enacted into law, would require TikTok to divest its US operations within 180 days or face a ban from US app stores, including those run by Apple and Google.

This move represents the most serious challenge yet to TikTok, which boasts a massive user base of 170 million Americans but has been criticized by some lawmakers as a potential national-security threat due to its Chinese ownership.

President Joe Biden has signaled his support for the legislation, stating that he would sign it into law if it passes the Senate.

However, the bill’s fate in the Senate remains uncertain, with Majority Leader Chuck Schumer yet to endorse it and some members, including Republican Rand Paul, expressing opposition.

TikTok has vehemently opposed the proposed ban, arguing that it would violate the First Amendment and have a detrimental impact on the economy, small businesses, and the millions of Americans who use the platform.

The company has also faced accusations of being a tool for Chinese propaganda, although it has consistently denied sharing user data with the Chinese government.

The House passage of the bill comes just days after its introduction, reflecting growing bipartisan concern over TikTok’s influence and potential risks to national security.

The swift action underscores the urgency with which lawmakers are seeking to address these concerns and highlights the mounting pressure on TikTok to address them or face significant consequences.

Continue Reading
Advertisement




Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending