TheNewsGuru

Tag: Facebook

  • White House releases details of Trump’s order upholding free speech online

    White House releases details of Trump’s order upholding free speech online

    The White House has released content of the executive order signed on Thursday by U.S. President Donald Trump to protect and uphold the free speech and rights of the American people.

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports Trump signed the executive order on Thursday, taking executive action to fight online censorship by tech corporations, including social media platforms, such as Twitter.

    The U.S. President had described Twitter action of fact checking his tweet as ridiculous, stressing that it amounted to gagging freedom of speech.

    See content of the executive order below:

    Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship

    By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

    Section 1. Policy. Free speech is the bedrock of American democracy. Our Founding Fathers protected this sacred right with the First Amendment to the Constitution. The freedom to express and debate ideas is the foundation for all of our rights as a free people.

    In a country that has long cherished the freedom of expression, we cannot allow a limited number of online platforms to hand pick the speech that Americans may access and convey on the internet. This practice is fundamentally un-American and anti-democratic. When large, powerful social media companies censor opinions with which they disagree, they exercise a dangerous power. They cease functioning as passive bulletin boards, and ought to be viewed and treated as content creators.

    The growth of online platforms in recent years raises important questions about applying the ideals of the First Amendment to modern communications technology. Today, many Americans follow the news, stay in touch with friends and family, and share their views on current events through social media and other online platforms. As a result, these platforms function in many ways as a 21st century equivalent of the public square.

    Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube wield immense, if not unprecedented, power to shape the interpretation of public events; to censor, delete, or disappear information; and to control what people see or do not see.

    As President, I have made clear my commitment to free and open debate on the internet. Such debate is just as important online as it is in our universities, our town halls, and our homes. It is essential to sustaining our democracy.

    Online platforms are engaging in selective censorship that is harming our national discourse. Tens of thousands of Americans have reported, among other troubling behaviors, online platforms “flagging” content as inappropriate, even though it does not violate any stated terms of service; making unannounced and unexplained changes to company policies that have the effect of disfavoring certain viewpoints; and deleting content and entire accounts with no warning, no rationale, and no recourse.

    Twitter now selectively decides to place a warning label on certain tweets in a manner that clearly reflects political bias. As has been reported, Twitter seems never to have placed such a label on another politician’s tweet. As recently as last week, Representative Adam Schiff was continuing to mislead his followers by peddling the long-disproved Russian Collusion Hoax, and Twitter did not flag those tweets. Unsurprisingly, its officer in charge of so-called ‘Site Integrity’ has flaunted his political bias in his own tweets.

    At the same time online platforms are invoking inconsistent, irrational, and groundless justifications to censor or otherwise restrict Americans’ speech here at home, several online platforms are profiting from and promoting the aggression and disinformation spread by foreign governments like China. One United States company, for example, created a search engine for the Chinese Communist Party that would have blacklisted searches for “human rights,” hid data unfavorable to the Chinese Communist Party, and tracked users determined appropriate for surveillance. It also established research partnerships in China that provide direct benefits to the Chinese military. Other companies have accepted advertisements paid for by the Chinese government that spread false information about China’s mass imprisonment of religious minorities, thereby enabling these abuses of human rights. They have also amplified China’s propaganda abroad, including by allowing Chinese government officials to use their platforms to spread misinformation regarding the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, and to undermine pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong.

    As a Nation, we must foster and protect diverse viewpoints in today’s digital communications environment where all Americans can and should have a voice. We must seek transparency and accountability from online platforms, and encourage standards and tools to protect and preserve the integrity and openness of American discourse and freedom of expression.

    Sec. 2. Protections Against Online Censorship. (a) It is the policy of the United States to foster clear ground rules promoting free and open debate on the internet. Prominent among the ground rules governing that debate is the immunity from liability created by section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act (section 230(c)). 47 U.S.C. 230(c). It is the policy of the United States that the scope of that immunity should be clarified: the immunity should not extend beyond its text and purpose to provide protection for those who purport to provide users a forum for free and open speech, but in reality use their power over a vital means of communication to engage in deceptive or pretextual actions stifling free and open debate by censoring certain viewpoints.

    Section 230(c) was designed to address early court decisions holding that, if an online platform restricted access to some content posted by others, it would thereby become a “publisher” of all the content posted on its site for purposes of torts such as defamation. As the title of section 230(c) makes clear, the provision provides limited liability “protection” to a provider of an interactive computer service (such as an online platform) that engages in “‘Good Samaritan’ blocking” of harmful content. In particular, the Congress sought to provide protections for online platforms that attempted to protect minors from harmful content and intended to ensure that such providers would not be discouraged from taking down harmful material. The provision was also intended to further the express vision of the Congress that the internet is a “forum for a true diversity of political discourse.” 47 U.S.C. 230(a)(3). The limited protections provided by the statute should be construed with these purposes in mind.

    In particular, subparagraph (c)(2) expressly addresses protections from “civil liability” and specifies that an interactive computer service provider may not be made liable “on account of” its decision in “good faith” to restrict access to content that it considers to be “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing or otherwise objectionable.” It is the policy of the United States to ensure that, to the maximum extent permissible under the law, this provision is not distorted to provide liability protection for online platforms that — far from acting in “good faith” to remove objectionable content — instead engage in deceptive or pretextual actions (often contrary to their stated terms of service) to stifle viewpoints with which they disagree. Section 230 was not intended to allow a handful of companies to grow into titans controlling vital avenues for our national discourse under the guise of promoting open forums for debate, and then to provide those behemoths blanket immunity when they use their power to censor content and silence viewpoints that they dislike. When an interactive computer service provider removes or restricts access to content and its actions do not meet the criteria of subparagraph (c)(2)(A), it is engaged in editorial conduct. It is the policy of the United States that such a provider should properly lose the limited liability shield of subparagraph (c)(2)(A) and be exposed to liability like any traditional editor and publisher that is not an online provider.

    (b) To advance the policy described in subsection (a) of this section, all executive departments and agencies should ensure that their application of section 230(c) properly reflects the narrow purpose of the section and take all appropriate actions in this regard. In addition, within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary), in consultation with the Attorney General, and acting through the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), shall file a petition for rulemaking with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requesting that the FCC expeditiously propose regulations to clarify:

    (i) the interaction between subparagraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of section 230, in particular to clarify and determine the circumstances under which a provider of an interactive computer service that restricts access to content in a manner not specifically protected by subparagraph (c)(2)(A) may also not be able to claim protection under subparagraph (c)(1), which merely states that a provider shall not be treated as a publisher or speaker for making third-party content available and does not address the provider’s responsibility for its own editorial decisions;

    (ii) the conditions under which an action restricting access to or availability of material is not “taken in good faith” within the meaning of subparagraph (c)(2)(A) of section 230, particularly whether actions can be “taken in good faith” if they are:

    (A) deceptive, pretextual, or inconsistent with a provider’s terms of service; or

    (B) taken after failing to provide adequate notice, reasoned explanation, or a meaningful opportunity to be heard; and

    (iii) any other proposed regulations that the NTIA concludes may be appropriate to advance the policy described in subsection (a) of this section.

    Sec. 3. Protecting Federal Taxpayer Dollars from Financing Online Platforms That Restrict Free Speech. (a) The head of each executive department and agency (agency) shall review its agency’s Federal spending on advertising and marketing paid to online platforms. Such review shall include the amount of money spent, the online platforms that receive Federal dollars, and the statutory authorities available to restrict their receipt of advertising dollars.

    (b) Within 30 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall report its findings to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

    (c) The Department of Justice shall review the viewpoint-based speech restrictions imposed by each online platform identified in the report described in subsection (b) of this section and assess whether any online platforms are problematic vehicles for government speech due to viewpoint discrimination, deception to consumers, or other bad practices.

    Sec. 4. Federal Review of Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices. (a) It is the policy of the United States that large online platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook, as the critical means of promoting the free flow of speech and ideas today, should not restrict protected speech. The Supreme Court has noted that social media sites, as the modern public square, “can provide perhaps the most powerful mechanisms available to a private citizen to make his or her voice heard.” Packingham v. North Carolina, 137 S. Ct. 1730, 1737 (2017). Communication through these channels has become important for meaningful participation in American democracy, including to petition elected leaders. These sites are providing an important forum to the public for others to engage in free expression and debate. Cf. PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74, 85-89 (1980).

    (b) In May of 2019, the White House launched a Tech Bias Reporting tool to allow Americans to report incidents of online censorship. In just weeks, the White House received over 16,000 complaints of online platforms censoring or otherwise taking action against users based on their political viewpoints. The White House will submit such complaints received to the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

    (c) The FTC shall consider taking action, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to prohibit unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, pursuant to section 45 of title 15, United States Code. Such unfair or deceptive acts or practice may include practices by entities covered by section 230 that restrict speech in ways that do not align with those entities’ public representations about those practices.

    (d) For large online platforms that are vast arenas for public debate, including the social media platform Twitter, the FTC shall also, consistent with its legal authority, consider whether complaints allege violations of law that implicate the policies set forth in section 4(a) of this order. The FTC shall consider developing a report describing such complaints and making the report publicly available, consistent with applicable law.

    Sec. 5. State Review of Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices and Anti-Discrimination Laws. (a) The Attorney General shall establish a working group regarding the potential enforcement of State statutes that prohibit online platforms from engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices. The working group shall also develop model legislation for consideration by legislatures in States where existing statutes do not protect Americans from such unfair and deceptive acts and practices. The working group shall invite State Attorneys General for discussion and consultation, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law.

    (b) Complaints described in section 4(b) of this order will be shared with the working group, consistent with applicable law. The working group shall also collect publicly available information regarding the following:

    (i) increased scrutiny of users based on the other users they choose to follow, or their interactions with other users;

    (ii) algorithms to suppress content or users based on indications of political alignment or viewpoint;

    (iii) differential policies allowing for otherwise impermissible behavior, when committed by accounts associated with the Chinese Communist Party or other anti-democratic associations or governments;

    (iv) reliance on third-party entities, including contractors, media organizations, and individuals, with indicia of bias to review content; and

    (v) acts that limit the ability of users with particular viewpoints to earn money on the platform compared with other users similarly situated.

    Sec. 6. Legislation. The Attorney General shall develop a proposal for Federal legislation that would be useful to promote the policy objectives of this order.

    Sec. 7. Definition. For purposes of this order, the term “online platform” means any website or application that allows users to create and share content or engage in social networking, or any general search engine.

    Sec. 8. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

    (i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

    (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

    (b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

    (c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

  • President Trump mulls executive order against social media

    President Trump mulls executive order against social media

    U.S. President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order on social media on Thursday, according to local media reports.

    The reports, citing unnamed White House officials, came a day after microblogging site, Twitter, tagged Trump’s tweets on mail-in voting as misleading.

    In the tweets, the president told his over 80 million followers that voting through mail, otherwise known as mail-in ballots, was prone to fraud.

    Shortly after, Twitter tagged the tweets with a circled exclamation mark followed by the text: “Get the facts about mail-in ballots” in a hyperlink.

    The link takes readers to a Twitter fact-check page that debunks the claim.

    This infuriated the president who accused Twitter of interfering in the Nov. 3 presidential election, and then threatened to “heavily regulate” or close down social media platforms.

    Details of the impending executive order were not provided, but Newsweek magazine offered a clue in its report.

    The magazine quoted two unnamed allies of the President in Congress as saying they were willing to strip Twitter of the “special speech liability immunity it receives because of the fact-checking flap”.

    Meanwhile, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has reportedly faulted Twitter for fact-checking Trump’s tweets.

    Zuckerberg reasoned the social media platforms should not be the “arbiters of truth”, according to the New York Post.

    The paper said the Facebook CEO spoke in an interview with Fox News scheduled to air on Thursday.

    “We have a different policy, I think, than Twitter on this.

    “I just believe strongly that Facebook shouldn’t be the arbiter of truth of everything that people say online.

    “In general, private companies probably shouldn’t be, especially these platform companies, shouldn’t be in the position of doing that,” he reportedly said.

  • 19-year-old fakes death on Facebook over financial pressure

    19-year-old fakes death on Facebook over financial pressure

    A 19-year-old girl, Margaret Ikumu, 19, of Oni community in Oju Local Government Area of Benue, has faked her own death on social media to avoid financial pressure from her mother.

    A statement signed by DSP Bala Elkana, the Police Public Relations Officer in Lagos State, made this known on Sunday.

    Elkana said that Ikumu, through her facebook account, reported to have died a few days ago and was secretly buried by her two friends, Marvelous Mary and Nneka Buddy, at Ajah area.

    The family of Ikumu had on May 15, 2020, petitioned the police after the news of her death was announced on Facebook by her friends, Marvellous Mary and Nneka Buddy, whom Margaret allegedly connived with over her disappearance.

    The family, who urged the police to investigate the circumstances surrounding the alleged death of Margaret, stated that she ‘died’ under controversial circumstances and accused her friends of burying her without their consent.

    According to one Tony Iji, who signed the petition on behalf of the family, Marvellous and Nneka were contacted by the family through Facebook and they told them that Margaret had instructed them not to allow members of her family to know anything about her death; hence she was buried without the family’s consent.

    The petition read in part, “Since then, all efforts by our family and our community here in Lagos to know the cause and circumstances surrounding Margaret’s death have been rebuffed by Marvellous and Nneka, who are the only persons with information about her death. They later sent a chat message on WhatsApp to a member of our family with a picture of a casket showing that Margaret had been buried.

    “All efforts by members of the family to get more details about the death and eventual burial of Margaret from Marvellous and Nneka Buddy have proved abortive due to their refusal to co-operate with us. Miss Marvellous Mary has threatened to discard her phone number 07040869026 after the burial as a way of blocking us from further reaching her and all efforts to call Margaret’s phone number, 0811377322, have not yielded any result as the phone is permanently switched off.

    “We, therefore, appeal to the police authority under your leadership to intervene by investigating the incident with a view to establishing the facts and circumstances surrounding her death and eventual burial without the knowledge and consent of her family.”

    However, in a twist, Margaret was said to have come out of hiding after the petition to the police went viral on the social media.

    According to the family, although the whereabouts of Margaret are still unknown, she has communicated with her mother to tell her that she is alive.

    In another statement by Iji, Margaret claimed that she was not aware of her obituary announcement on her Facebook wall.

    The statement read in part, “To our surprise, in the evening of May 16, the unexpected result from the massive media publicity happened; Margaret, who was purportedly deceased, was forced out of hiding when she was noticed online through her Facebook page, which was offline throughout the period.

    “When contacts were made with her on Facebook, she responded and later received phone calls from her mother and few of her uncles, and she told them that she did not know the reason for the obituary announcement on her Facebook wall.

    “Our findings showed that the whole thing was a deliberate conspiracy by Margaret in connivance with her friends to stage-manage a fake story about her death to confuse her immediate family and the larger society for whatever reason that is best known to them.

    “Till now, we have not been able to extract from her the reasons for her action, because she is still largely incommunicado even though she has affirmed that she is alive.”

    When contacted, the state Police Public Relations Officer, Bala Elkana, who confirmed the receipt of the petition, said the police had been able to locate Margaret’s whereabouts.

    “I am aware of the petition. We have been able to identify the location of the girl; she’s alive. We will investigate the report of her being dead and the reason behind it,” he stated.

    However, following the investigation, the police in a statement signed by DSP Bala Elkana, the Police Public Relations Officer in Lagos State on Sunday, confirmed that the teenage girl faked her own death on social media to avoid financial pressure from her mother.

    “The family of the fake deceased further stated that they were able to establish contact with the said friends who confirmed to them that their daughter is dead.

    “To make them believe that the girl is dead, they sent WhatsApp chats to a member of the girl’s family with picture of a casket showing that the girl is buried.

    “The family also got in touch with a man on phone who claimed to be her boyfriend. He corroborated the claim that she is dead,” he said.

    Elkana said that the girl was eventually found by the Police to be alive and was working as a house maid in an estate at Ajah.

    “When her employer saw the report of her purported death, they quickly informed the Police and she was brought to Ajah Police Station.

    “In her statement, she (Ikumu) confessed to have created the facebook account and posted her obituary with intent to keep her family away from her.

    “She said that her mother was putting financial pressure on her by constantly demanding that she sends money to her,” he said.

    Elkana said that the girl was apparently bitter with her mother and uncles over their inability to sponsor her education after the death of her father.

    He said that Ikumu came to Lagos to work with a view to saving some money and returning to school.

  • Half of Facebook employees to work remotely in 10 years – Zuckerberg

    Facebook’s founder and chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, says he expects the coronavirus pandemic will have a long-lasting impact on working practices.

    Zuckerberg expects that in ten years, about half of the social network company’s employees will be working remotely, he said in an interview with technology news site The Verge.

    He emphasised that the 50 per cent figure was his estimate and not an official announcement.

    According to a survey of Facebook employees, one in five expressed strong support for working from home permanently, while a further 20 per cent expressed “some interest”.

    However, 40 per cent said this would not be practical due to the nature of their jobs.

    Zuckerberg expects that in the future, more employees will hired to work from home from the beginning of their contracts.

    Other major tech firms, including Twitter, had previously announced their employees could continue to work from home even after social distancing restrictions brought in during the pandemic eased.

    Prior to the pandemic, the focus of big U.S. tech companies had been to have all employees working together at huge headquarters, some including Facebook, offering employees bonuses to live nearby.

    Facebook had expanded its Menlo Park headquarters with a huge hangar-style campus built by star architect Frank Gehry.

  • Graphic Photo: Man beats wife to stupour, brags about it on social media

    Graphic Photo: Man beats wife to stupour, brags about it on social media

    A man who beat his wife mercilessly and boasted about it on Facebook has been arrested by the police in Lagos.

    The Lagos State Domestic and Sexual Violence Response Team, DSVRT disclosed this on its twitter handle on Thursday.

    According to DSVRT, its attention was drawn to a viral post on Facebook wherein one Afobaje Maiyegun boasted that he had just beaten up his wife and declared he is ‘’waiting for her police‘’ to come and arrest him.

    “Immediately, the team reached out to ACP Gbolahan Odugbemi, Area Commander, Area J who ensured that the said person was arrested immediately,” it said.

    DSVRT said preliminary investigation conducted revealed that this was not the first time the said Mr. Maiyegun would perpetrate such a dastardly act.

    “A partner NGO was on ground to assist with the investigation. The case is set to be charged to court on Friday, 15th May, 2020.

    “This is to sound a clear warning that the Governor of Lagos State, Mr. Babajide Sanwo-Olu has declared a zero tolerance to Sexual and Gender Based Violence in the State and as such perpetrators will face the full weight of the law,” it said.

  • [Video] FG secures release of Nigerian woman put up for sale on Facebook by Lebanese

    [Video] FG secures release of Nigerian woman put up for sale on Facebook by Lebanese

    Abike Dabiri-Erewa, Chairman of the Nigerians in Diaspora Commission (NIDCOM), on Tuesday, said the Nigerian woman, Peace Busari Ufuoma, who was put on sale by a Lebanese has been released.

    Dabiri said the 30-year-old Oyo indigene was released to the Nigerian Embassy, Lebanon Beirut on Tuesday.

    TheNewsGuru(TNG) had reported that Jerro, who resides in Beirut Lebanon, sent in an image alongside the data page of the 30-year-old Nigerian, Peace Busari Ufuoma to a Facebook group called ‘Buy and Sell Lebanon.’

    The culprit had placed a $1,000 bill on the domestic worker.

    Also, the Lebanese Government had last week arrested Wael Jerro.

    Confirming Ufuoma’s release, Dabiri on Twitter wrote, ”Update on Nigerian girl put up for sale Lebanese, Wael Jerro on Facebook.

    “She has been rescued and safely with officials of the Nigerian Mission in Beirut. More updates later,” she added.

  • Lebanese man, Wael Jerro arrested for advertising Nigerian lady for sale on Facebook

    Lebanese man, Wael Jerro arrested for advertising Nigerian lady for sale on Facebook

    A Lebanese man, Wael Jerro, has been arrested for advertising a Nigerian lady for sale on Facebook.

    The Nigerians in Diaspora Commission (NIDCOM) confirmed this in a tweet on Thursday, a day after Lebanese authorities condemned the incident.

    It noted that following the Facebook post by the suspect, the Nigerian Mission in Lebanon had swung into action.

    An international passport said to have been obtained from the victim in May 2018 revealed that she hailed from Ibadan, the Oyo State capital.

    NIDCOM said the case was reported to the Lebanese authorities while a manhunt was launched to apprehend the suspect.

    According to it, the Lebanese Ministry of Labour issued a statement in which it said Jerro’s action was completely unethical and in contravention of the country’s laws.

  • Facebook expands COVID-19 information centre to Nigeria, 16 other Africa countries

    Facebook says it will be expanding its Coronavirus Information Centre to 17 more countries in sub-Saharan African, including Nigeria

    Kojo Boakye, Facebook’s Head of Public Policy, Africa, who made the disclosure on Thursday, noted that the information centres form part of Facebook’s effort to help the global fight against the Coronavirus pandemic.

    According to him, Facebook will be providing people with the latest news and information from trusted health authorities.

    “The COVID-19 Information Centre features at the top of news feed that provides central place for people to get informed about the virus.

    “It includes real-time update from national health authorities; organisations such as the World Health Organisation; helpful articles, videos and posts about social distancing and preventing the spread of COVID-19.

    “Facebook users can opt in to follow the centre to get notifications and see updates in the news feed from official government health authorities, “Boakye said said in a sttement.

    He also said that they had already launched the centre in South Africa and would now expand to the sub-Saharan Africa markets.

    The head of public policy further said that the centre would be expanded to Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chad, Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia and Gabon.

    He said other countries were Nigeria, Senegal, Seychelles, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Togo, Guinea, Kenya, Mali and Mauritania.

    “We have built the centres in collaboration with national health partners to ensure that people can get access to information from trusted health sources.

    “The launch of the COVID-19 Information Centre on Facebook in more than 17 countries across sub-Saharan Africa aligns with the commitment to make accurate, timely information about the pandemic accessible to all communities,” Boakye said.

  • Coronavirus: Facebook, Google direct staff to work from home

    Coronavirus: Facebook, Google direct staff to work from home

    The managements of Facebook Inc and Google have urged their San Francisco Bay area employees to work from home to minimize the risk of spreading Covid-19.

    Earlier, Facebook had announced that its Seattle office be shut down after one of its contractors got infected.

    Facebook said it is “strongly recommending that all Bay area employees and contingent staff work from home starting Friday.”

    According to the statement, employees and contractors involved in the site’s safety and security will continue to work on-site, while all the Bay Area events will remain canceled.

    According to Facebook’s spokesperson, Anthony Harrison, the decision is “based on the guidance from Santa Clara County on Thursday”.

  • Facebook looking to open content moderation for external audit

    Facebook is working to enable external reviews on its content moderation systems, chief executive Mark Zuckerberg said in a comment piece on the Financial Times on Monday.

    The tech giant has been criticised for being too slow to remove hate speech and terrorist propaganda from its platform, but has also been accused of suppressing right-wing voices.

    In the article, Zuckerberg repeated his appeal for government regulation on issues such as electoral advertising, harmful content and data portability.

    “Companies like mine need better oversight when we make decisions, which is why we’re creating an independent Oversight Board so people can appeal Facebook’s content decisions.

    “We’re also looking at opening up our content moderation systems for external audit,’’ he added.

    Facebook came in for intense criticism after the deadly attack on two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, in 2019 during which the attacker live-streamed the events on Facebook.

    The company has also been criticised for allowing Russian-backed trolls to post ads aimed at influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election, as well as over the Cambridge Analytica data harvesting scandal.

    Zuckerberg said that his company was working with governments, inclusing New Zealand’s, “on what regulation could look like.”

    “I believe good regulation may hurt Facebook’s business in the near term but it will be better for everyone, including us, over the long term.

    “If we don’t create standards that people feel are legitimate, they won’t trust institutions or technology,’’ Zuckerberg added.