New Decision Reveals Meta’s Uneven Treatment of News Reporting on the Assassination of Mexican Mayoral Candidate
12 de Dezembro de 2024
In four cases of videos showing the assassination of Mexican mayoral candidate José Alfredo Cabrera Barrientos, the Board notes how Meta treated posts differently when three of them should have benefited from the same outcome – to remain up under the newsworthiness allowance. These three posts were shared by news outlets clearly reporting on a political assassination ahead of Mexico’s elections: Meta left two up but removed one. Taking down reports on issues being debated by the public limits access to essential information and hinders free speech. This is concerning given the risks that news outlets face in Mexico when reporting on state corruption and organized crime. While there was an uneven application of the newsworthiness allowance in these cases, the Board also sets out its concerns about the effectiveness of the allowance itself. To address this, the Board reiterates its recent recommendation from the Footage of Moscow Terrorist Attack decision, calling for an exception to be made to the rule that does not allow third-party imagery showing the moment of designated attacks on visible victims. This updated approach would help ensure fairer treatment for all users.
About the Cases
In May 2024, four pieces of content about the assassination of a candidate running for mayor in the Mexican state of Guerrero were either posted by or reshared from news media accounts in Latin America. All four posts include similar videos showing José Alfredo Cabrera Barrientos on the campaign trail before a gun is aimed at him, followed by blurry images and sounds of gunshots.
The first two cases involve posts shared by large media organizations. The caption for the first post discusses how many candidates have been murdered during the election cycle, while the audio for the video includes a statement by the state prosecutor’s office explaining that Cabrera Barrientos was under protection when killed. It was viewed about 59,000 times. The second post includes a warning about the video’s sensitivity and a caption reporting on the Governor of Guerrero’s statement condemning the murder. It was viewed more than a million times.
As Meta had designated this assassination as a violating violent event under its Dangerous Organizations and Individuals policy, another version of the video had already been added to a Media Matching Service (MMS) bank, which is programmed to remove the same content. Under the policy, users are not allowed to share third-party imagery depicting the moment of such designated attacks on visible victims. The first two posts, which were identified by the MMS bank and referred to Meta’s subject matter experts for additional review, were left up despite breaking Meta’s rules. They were given a newsworthiness allowance, occasionally granted for content Meta decides has high public interest value. Both posts remain on Meta’s platforms with “Mark as Disturbing” warning screens and newsworthy labels, but were referred to the Board.
In the third and fourth cases, users appealed Meta’s decisions to remove their posts to the Board. The third post involved a reshare of the video, with a message imposed on it stating that an uncensored version was available on Telegram. This had 17,000 views. The fourth post included a caption noting who had been shot and injured at the scene. It had 11,000 views. After an MMS bank identified both posts, they were removed.
The assassination of Cabrera Barrientos took place on the final day of campaigning ahead of Mexico’s nationwide elections on June 2. Political violence has been a feature of recent elections in the country, with organized crime partially responsible. This has led candidates to drop out of election races, fearful for their lives.
Key Findings
While Meta was right to keep up the first two posts on its platforms as newsworthy content, the Board finds the company was not right to take down the post in the fourth case from Instagram. This post also had high public interest value. There was no material difference to justify a different outcome. Even after the Board selected the fourth case, Meta failed to apply the same newsworthiness allowance, stating this post sensationalized the footage by informing users it had gone viral. However, this detail is included alongside other information about the shooting, including details about the number of casualties, the Governor’s statement and the fact the shooter was killed at the event. Although Cabrera Barrientos is visible and identifiable, he was a public figure attending an election rally, so the privacy concerns reduce and the public interest value outweighs risks of harm.
On the third post, which directed users to a Telegram link for an uncensored, graphic version of the video to get around Meta’s prohibition on sharing third-party imagery of attacks on visible victims, the majority of the Board agrees with Meta that this content posed greater risks to security and privacy – and should have been taken down. For the majority, Meta was right not to grant a newsworthiness allowance, especially given the post had no additional caption or commentary indicating its purpose was to inform others or condemn the assassination. A minority of the Board disagrees, finding that the third post should also qualify for the newsworthiness allowance, as it is similar to the others.
As the Board recently noted in its Footage of Moscow Terrorist Attack decision, imagery of designated attacks can be shared for multiple reasons. While Meta is concerned about such content glorifying, supporting or representing criminal groups’ activities, the rule that does not allow users to share third-party imagery of designated attacks on visible victims is leading to removal of content with low or no risk of harm. Of relevance to these cases, experts have noted that criminal groups in Mexico do not generally use videos of political assassinations for recruitment purposes, although they may share them to intimidate. Furthermore, the Board found no evidence of this footage having been recorded by the perpetrators or being used to inspire copycat behavior.
While the Board found the newsworthiness allowance should be applied to the fourth post, it notes that the allowance is rarely used since there are limited ways for Meta to identify content to benefit from it. In combination with the multiple factors that need to be considered to grant the allowance, this increases the risks of the allowance’s random application, to the detriment of users. This is why the Board believes that a change to Meta’s policy, as highlighted in our Footage of Moscow Terrorist Attack decision, is preferable to Meta’s current approach.
The Oversight Board’s Decision
The Oversight Board upholds Meta’s decisions in the first three cases. The Board overturns Meta in the fourth case, requiring the post to be restored with a “Mark as Disturbing” warning screen.
The Board reiterates its recommendation from the recent Footage of Moscow Terrorist Attack decision, stating that Meta should allow, with a “Mark as Disturbing” warning screen, third-party imagery of a designated event showing the moment of attacks on visible but not personally identifiable victims for news reporting, awareness raising or to condemn.
For Further Information
To read public comments for this case, click here.
