Meta said Thursday that its Facebook network will give users whose posts have been deleted more explanations before "throwing them into Facebook jail."
"Facebook jail" is a term popular among Facebook users for accounts that have been disabled or banned for posting about controversial topics or for violating the platform's rules.
After feedback from the Meta Oversight Board, an independent group formed in 2019 to advise the company, Facebook decided to continue explaining to users why posts were deleted and then impose harsher penalties, such as suspending their posting ability.
Facebook's change is intended to prevent users from making the same mistake over and over again in good faith, especially since a single mistake in the old system could lead to account deactivation without explanation.
“Our analysis found that nearly 80% of users with fewer violations stopped violating our policies within 60 days,” Monica Bickert, vice president of content policies, writes on the meta blog. "This means that most people respond well to warnings and explanations because they don't want to violate our policies," she added.
Under the new policy, Facebook will issue users with up to seven warnings before imposing harsher penalties. Bickert said the system would prevent relatively harmless posts from immediately leading to a subsequent 30-day ban, which the regulator said unfairly affected many users.
While much of the new policy affects users who inadvertently break the rules, the announcement also covers how the company handles more serious violations.
Posting content such as: “Terrorism, Child Exploitation, Human Trafficking, Suicide Promotion, Sexual Exploitation, Selling Non-Medical Drugs, or Advertising to Dangerous Individuals and Institutions” will result in serious consequences including: account suspension and suspension.
The (Supervisory Board) wrote in its response that it welcomes the changes but remains convinced that Sanda can do more to improve the policy. The committee said journalists and activists could face "serious consequences" if they erred in discussing sensitive issues.
"For this reason, (the regulator) has requested transparency of diligent alerts and will continue to do so," the (regulatory body) statement said. "The board also believes that users should be able to explain the context of their posts when submitting appeals to META, and content moderators should consider that context whenever possible," he added.