Tuesday, August 11, 2026
LIVEThe Unrelenting Cyber Battle: Hacking Threats and the Imperative of Robust Data Protection///Navigating the Cyber Labyrinth: Bolstering Defenses Against Evolving Hacking Threats///The Dual Front War: Battling Hacking and Bolstering Data Protection in the Digital Age///The Ever-Evolving Cyber Threat Landscape: Navigating Hacking and Fortifying Data Protection///The Unseen Battle: Fortifying Data in an Age of Relentless Hacking///The Unseen War: Hacking's Relentless Advance and the Imperative of Data Protection///The Evolving Threat Landscape: Hacking, Data Protection, and the Imperative for Proactive Security///Navigating the Digital Minefield: Bolstering Data Protection in an Era of Relentless Hacking///The Dual Fronts of Digital Defense: Combating Hacking and Fortifying Data Protection///Hacking's New Frontier: Fortifying Data Protection in the Age of Advanced Cyber Threats///The Dual Front: Navigating Hacking Threats and Fortifying Data Protection in the Digital Age///Navigating the Digital Gauntlet: The Evolving Nexus of Hacking and Data Protection///The Unrelenting Cyber Battle: Hacking Threats and the Imperative of Robust Data Protection///Navigating the Cyber Labyrinth: Bolstering Defenses Against Evolving Hacking Threats///The Dual Front War: Battling Hacking and Bolstering Data Protection in the Digital Age///The Ever-Evolving Cyber Threat Landscape: Navigating Hacking and Fortifying Data Protection///The Unseen Battle: Fortifying Data in an Age of Relentless Hacking///The Unseen War: Hacking's Relentless Advance and the Imperative of Data Protection///The Evolving Threat Landscape: Hacking, Data Protection, and the Imperative for Proactive Security///Navigating the Digital Minefield: Bolstering Data Protection in an Era of Relentless Hacking///The Dual Fronts of Digital Defense: Combating Hacking and Fortifying Data Protection///Hacking's New Frontier: Fortifying Data Protection in the Age of Advanced Cyber Threats///The Dual Front: Navigating Hacking Threats and Fortifying Data Protection in the Digital Age///Navigating the Digital Gauntlet: The Evolving Nexus of Hacking and Data Protection///
Subscribe
Cyber Security
Independent · Digital
Thehackingpost
CybersecurityAI-assisted

Meta's Oversight Board made just 53 decisions in 2023The board says it wants to weigh in on “demoted content” on Facebook and Instagram.

The Oversight Board has published its latest annual report looking at its influence on Meta and ability to shift the policies that govern Facebook and Instagram. The board says that in 2023 it received 398,597 appeals, the vast majority of which came…

The Oversight Board has published its latest annual report looking at its influence on Meta and ability to shift the policies that govern Facebook and Instagram. The board says that in 2023 it received 398,597 appeals, the vast majority of which came from Facebook users. But it took on only a tiny fraction of those cases, issuing a total of 53 decisions.

The board suggests, however, that the cases it selects can have an outsize impact on Meta’s users. For example, it credits its work for influencing improvements to Meta’s strike system and the “account status” feature that helps users check if their posts have violated any of the company’s rules.

Sussing out the board’s overall influence, though, is more complicated. The group says that between January of 2021 and May of 2024, it has sent a total of 266 recommendations to Meta. Of those, the company has fully or partially implemented 75, and reported “progress” on 81. The rest have been declined, “omitted or reframed,” or else Meta has claimed some level of implementation but hasn’t offered proof to the board. (There are five recommendations currently awaiting a response.) Those numbers raise some questions about how much Meta is willing to change in response to the board it created.

The board says that in 2023 it received 398,597 appeals, the vast majority of which came from Facebook users.
Danielle Frost · Thehackingpost

Oversight Board Notably, the report has no criticism for Meta and offers no analysis of Meta’s efforts (or lack thereof) to comply with its recommendations. The report calls out a case in which it recommended that Meta suspend the former prime minister of Cambodia for six months, noting that it overturned the company’s decision to leave up a video that could have incited violence. But the report makes no mention of the fact that Meta declined to suspend the former prime minister’s account and declined to further clarify its rules for public figures.

The report also hints at thorny topics the board may take on in the coming months. It mentions that it wants to look at content “demotion,” or what some Facebook and Instagram users may call “shadowbans” (the term is a loaded one for Meta, which has repeatedly denied that its algorithms intentionally punish users for no reason). “One area we are interested in exploring is demoted content, where a platform limits a post’s visibility without telling the user,” the Oversight Board writes.

Advertisement

For now, it’s not clear exactly how the group could tackle the issue. The board’s purview currently allows it to weigh in on specific pieces of content that Meta has removed or left up after a user appeal. But it’s possible the board could find another way into the issue. A spokesperson for the Oversight Board notes that the group expressed concern about demoted content in its opinion on content related to the Israel-Hamas war. “This is something the board would like to further explore as Meta’s decisions around demotion are pretty opaque,” the spokesperson said.

Based on reporting by www.engadget.com.

AI transparency. This article was produced with the assistance of artificial intelligence and published under human editorial oversight. AI systems can make mistakes. Read how we use AI (EU AI Act, Art. 50).
Related Stories