Meta’s Attempt to Dodge Transparency in South African Election Probe Sparks Controversy
In a shocking display of disregard for transparency, social media giant Meta Platforms has refused to comply with a Promotion of Access to Information Act (Paia) request made by the Campaign for Free Expression (CFE), citing its legal residence in the United States. But is this a legitimate excuse for a company that operates in South Africa, or a thinly veiled attempt to avoid accountability?
CFE Demands Truth About Meta’s Election Interference
The CFE, a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting free speech and open communication, requested information from Meta about its actions and protocols regarding South Africa’s 29 May general election. But Meta’s response was nothing short of evasive, citing its legal presence in the US as a reason to withhold crucial information from the public.
The Fight for Transparency
CFE Executive Director Anton Harber argues that Meta’s justification is "devoid of any legal merit" and amounts to an "unreasonable and formalistic attempt to obscure the transparency sought by the CFE in the request." He claims that Meta’s refusal to comply with Paia is an affront to the constitutional rights of South African citizens and that the company’s actions could lead to a "lawless" environment where foreign entities operate with impunity.
The Gaping Hole in Meta’s Disclosure
Harber also criticized Meta’s curation of the data it eventually made public, stating that there are "serious gaps" between what the CFE requested and what Meta chose to disclose. He highlighted three key topics that were ignored by Meta in its disclosures, including its risk assessment and mitigation plan concerning the election, its plans for detecting online attacks on journalists, and how it will monitor its performance.
The Bigger Picture
This controversy raises important questions about the role of social media in democratic elections and the responsibility of tech companies to ensure transparency and accountability. It also highlights the need for regulatory bodies to take a stronger stance in ensuring that foreign entities operating in South Africa comply with local laws and regulations.
The Verdict
As the Information Regulator conducts its investigation into Meta’s actions, it’s clear that the company’s attempts to dodge transparency have sparked widespread outrage and concern. Will Meta be forced to come clean about its actions and protocols, or will it continue to rely on legal technicalities to avoid accountability? Only time will tell.
