Meta’s oversight board says banning accounts lacks due process and transparency

The Meta Oversight Board, the independent governing body that makes policy recommendations to the technology company, said Thursday that Meta account deactivations lack due process, violations are distributed without clarity, and there is little customer support for appeals.

The board, which recently received increased funding to continue its work until 2028, launched the Meta Account Violations Policy Investigation earlier this year to review a case involving threats of violence against a journalist. The board agreed that Meta was right to permanently disable the account due to the severity of the threats.

However, when looking into the matter, the board found what it described as “systemic human rights concerns”, and a “lack of transparency and consistency” when it came to a two-system meta-approach to disabling accounts.

This is a reference to the two different ways in which action can be taken against accounts: one involving violations, some of which can be severe, and the other for “egregious” violations that merit permanent account disabling. The distinction between what leads to one type of violation or another is not clear or well-documented, the board said.

The council also called on the social media giant to charge users for access to Meta Verified, which supposedly includes “access to 24/7 email or chat agent support,” but failed to provide users with disabled accounts with any kind of “meaningful assistance.”

Meta users across Facebook, Instagram, and other Meta apps have been dealing with this issue for years. As Meta’s moderation systems became more automated over the years, there were fewer resources when they made mistakes to get any kind of help from the company. This was devastating for users who lost their personal accounts, or even those from their businesses, due to false accusations. Some have even filed lawsuits over the matter or are in the process of doing so.

The board took up the issue of permanent bans in a landmark case following a wave of recent bans affecting Facebook and Instagram

There is no support and no appeals process

Following our coverage of the bans, TechCrunch received a steady stream of reports from affected users, begging us to bring their cases to Meta’s attention

For example, retired Los Angeles County firefighter and paramedic Richard Bowles, who was building a health brand on Meta platforms, claimed that his personal account had been banned without identifying any specific post and without human review.

Alleged child sexual exploitation (CSE) violations are another common occurrence that results in bans, which is devastating for innocent parties.

For example, a PR professional reached out to us and asked to remain anonymous because his account was banned due to false accusations against CSE, even though no content was cited in the ban and there have been no new posts from him for weeks. They told us that Meta’s claim was “vicious and despicable”, and filed a case with the Oversight Board.

Another person, Manomi Jayakody, said his account was also banned due to CSE, again without any specific content, action or violation reported.

“I fully understand and support the critical importance of CSE enforcement and online safety. However, when accounts are flagged into these dangerous categories without due process, transparency, or consistent human oversight… the consequences for innocent users are dire,” they wrote to TechCrunch and other reporters in an email. “In my case, I received no explanation, no evidence, and no opportunity to clarify or correct any alleged issue.”

In another example, a bird rescue was banned, of all things, because of CSE articles. “It’s an account about our rescue pigeons. It has over 60,000 followers, and we regularly use this account to contact other volunteers who rescue birds and find adopters or medical help for all the birds we help,” they pleaded in an email to TechCrunch.

Another creator, Albert Olgaard, who has 325,000 followers on Instagram, said his company profiles were shut down overnight due to allegations of “fraud,” without mentioning the mistakes he made. When he tried to appeal, a message appeared on the screen saying: “You cannot request another review of this decision.” He said that this step affected him financially.

Designer Alex Smola also woke up one day to find his account permanently disabled.

“The account was associated with legitimate business activity, including page outreach, customer outreach, marketing, advertising, and lead generation,” Smola wrote in an email to TechCrunch. “Since the deletion, I have experienced ongoing business disruption, reputational damage, and significant stress, while being unable to obtain any meaningful human review through Meta support channels.”

This echoes several other complaints TechCrunch fielded from Meta Verified subscribers who said they weren’t getting the support they paid for with a subscription. One person even said that a Meta agent ended their conversation when they mentioned an EU regulation, the General Data Protection Regulation.

These are just a small selection of the reports we’ve received since covering the story, and emails continue to come in from people in desperate need of help.

As evidenced by these and other examples, there are due process concerns about banning accounts. As a result, the Board recommends that Meta provide users with a dashboard where they can easily review their account statistics, past violations, and information about appeal options, along with clear notifications about violations at the time they are imposed.

These warnings or violation reports must include the time they were imposed, the specific rule violated, the penalty imposed, and options for appeal.

In addition, the board says Meta must provide users with information about the role AI plays in reviewing content and imposing warnings or penalties, among other things.

In response to the Board’s report, Meta shared the following statement: “We welcome the Oversight Board’s decision on this case. The Board of Directors supported Meta’s decision to permanently disable the account. After conducting a review of the recommendations made by the Board of Directors, we will update this post with initial responses to those recommendations.”