請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/92108
標題: | 社群媒體時代的言論自由界線:以「監察委員會」對「立即危害」與「容許差別」之相關裁決為中心 The Boundaries of Freedom of Speech in the Social Media Era: Focusing on the Oversight Board’s Decisions Regarding “Imminent Harm” and “Allowance” |
作者: | 林彥廷 Yen-Ting Eddy Lin |
指導教授: | 林明昕 Ming-Hsin Lin |
關鍵字: | 社群媒體,言論自由,Facebook,監察委員會,立即危害,容許差別, Social Media,Freedom of Speech,Facebook,Oversight Board,Imminent Harm,Allowance, |
出版年 : | 2024 |
學位: | 碩士 |
摘要: | 言論自由作為人民基本權利,也是民主體制的根基所在,但若目的為追求重要公共利益且手段符合比例原則時,國家仍得以法律限制之。然而,對於社群媒體而言,決定內容是否能顯示於平台之上,往往僅是根據私人科技公司自行制定的政策規範,卻儼然已形成國際間最廣泛、適用最多人的言論自由標準。
本文透過耙梳Meta公司為Facebook、Instagram制定的《社群守則》等內容管理政策、用於審查內容及執行政策的方式,及監督該公司對言論限制是否符合國際人權標準的「監察委員會」,來試圖建構、理解全球最大的社群媒體平台進行內容管理的體系。 此外,本文藉由分析至2023年10月,監察委員會所作成的53件案例裁決中涉及兩項不確定概念的「立即危害」及「容許差別」的案件,釐清前者作為社群媒體得移除、封鎖內容的主要原則之一,係源自聯合國《拉巴特行動計畫》的六項門檻測試。監察委員會並未著重於使用者的發佈意圖、言論與危險的時間差,而更關注與內容有關的危險是否在發佈時已發生或持續進行中,以及評估背景、環境影響下,危害風險實現的可能性。 本文進一步指出,「容許差別」為Meta公司創設出對於社群媒體言論自由界線的例外。監察委員會對於出現在政府專制、言論自由受壓迫的國家、地區,或與揭露侵害人權的行為相關的內容,傾向認定為具有新聞價值,在未達「立即危害」的情形下,縱然該內容違反《社群守則》,亦會例外允許繼續顯示於平台上;或雖不具新聞價值,但保留該則爭議內容有助於實現平台的核心價值時,也例外地不予移除,為「三段雙軌」的審查流程。 Freedom of speech, as a fundamental right of the people and a cornerstone of democratic systems, can still be legally restricted by states in pursuit of significant public interests, provided the means are proportionate. However, for social media, the decision to display content on platforms is usually based merely on policies set by private technology companies. Yet, these policies have seemingly become the most widely applied and universal standards for freedom of speech internationally. This thesis analyzes the Community Standards and other content policies enacted by Meta for Facebook and Instagram, the measures used for content review and policy implementation, and the operation of the Oversight Board to oversee whether the company's content moderation decisions are aligned with international human rights standards. This study attempts to understand the content moderation system of the world's largest social media platforms. Additionally, this thesis analyzes 53 case decisions made by the Oversight Board up to October 2023, focusing on cases regarding the concepts of "imminent harm" and "allowance." The former, a key principle for social media to remove or block content, is derived from the six-part threshold test of The Rabat Plan of Action by the United Nations. The Oversight Board does not strictly require the clarification of users'' intent or the temporal gap between speech and danger. Instead, it places more emphasis on whether the related danger had already happened or was ongoing at the time of posting, and it considers the possibility of harm being realized in the context of the content's background and environment. This study further points out that "allowance" serves as an exception developed by Meta to the boundaries of freedom of speech on social media. The Oversight Board tends to recognize content related to autocratic regimes, suppressing freedom of speech, or unveiling human rights violations as newsworthy. If it does not pose "imminent harm," such content is allowed to remain on the platform even if it violates the Community Standards. Alternatively, if it lacks newsworthiness, but retaining the content adheres to Meta''s core values or if removing it would contradict them, it is also exceptionally retained, constituting a "three-level, two-track" review process. |
URI: | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/92108 |
DOI: | 10.6342/NTU202400262 |
全文授權: | 同意授權(全球公開) |
顯示於系所單位: | 新聞研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-112-1.pdf | 4.11 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。