Meta S Conditional Apology Is Censorship In Disguise

---

There were many happy faces in the government agencies this week. All that was needed was a face-to-face meeting on Monday to correct what the government perceived as wrong.
Understandably, many political leaders, chief among them Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, were hot under the collar last week, criticising Meta for taking down a post from the premier’s account.
The post featured him in a photograph meeting the late Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in May.
The removal notification from Instagram stated that the post contained “symbols, praise, or support of people and organisations that we define as dangerous”.
In condemning the removal, the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) said: “This action clearly shows discrimination against the situation in Palestine and the country’s leaders”.
But on Monday, we had great news. Bernama reported that the PMO gave Meta representatives a tongue-lashing over the removal of Anwar’s posts on the Hamas leader.
It also made several demands from Meta, including an open apology.
On Tuesday, it was back to the status quo - almost.
The posts were restored but included a footnote that they are still in violation of Meta’s community guidelines.
On Instagram, there is a clear notice stating: “This post goes against our Community Guidelines but has been left on Instagram for public awareness”.
On Facebook, the notice is much smaller and simply states, “This post is allowed for public awareness”.
Meta, the company behind Facebook, apologised for the removal and cited “an operational error”.
Kettle calling the pot black
With all the hype about boycotting American products and similar activities, isn’t it ironic that the government has to use US-based social media platforms to air its position?
Or is it hypocrisy? After all, Facebook, Instagram, and X are as American as McDonald’s and KFC, which Malaysians rejected in large droves since the Israeli offensive in Gaza.
The PMO said it conveyed “deep disappointment” in Meta’s actions, calling them “discriminatory, unjust, and a blatant suppression of free expression”.
Isn’t it a case of the kettle calling the pot black? How many times have Malaysians been subjected to unnecessary and unwarranted censorship, sometimes prosecution, for expressing their views?
According to data published by Facebook owner Meta as well as TikTok, a record number of social media posts and accounts in Malaysia were restricted in 2023.
Between January and June this year, Meta restricted about 3,100 pages and posts on its Facebook and Instagram platforms from being viewed by users in Malaysia because they were reported to have allegedly violated local laws, according to data in the firm’s twice-yearly Transparency Report.
The figure was six times higher than in the previous half-year period and the highest since the company began reporting content restrictions in Malaysia in 2017.
In the case of TikTok, it received 2,202 government requests to remove about 6,000 pieces of content, according to its bi-annual “Government Removal Requests Report” for 2023.
Company data showed that the most requests - 1,862 of the total - came from July to December, about a month after the country’s ranking plummeted on a global press freedom index.
Malaysia’s communications regulator said in a statement that requests to remove content on social media platforms were aimed at protecting users from “the significant increase of online harms, and not about stifling diverse views”.
The Sedition Act and, more specifically, Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act (CMA) have been used to stifle dissent and free speech.
As fellow columnist Andrew Sia found out, even the wrong interpretation of words and phrases can incur the wrath of the authorities.
M’sian social media platform
But even bigger news awaited Malaysians later in the day.
Communications Minister Fahmi Fadzil said the government was considering a proposal to develop a social media application specifically for Malaysians.
He said this was because some social media application providers were profiting off Malaysians but failed to ensure user safety.
But before interested parties could present their proposals or hawk a prototype, he changed tack the following day.
He said developing a social media application specifically for Malaysians is not a top priority as the cost would be very high.
So, why make the announcement in the first place?
Two issues: Does Malaysia have the numbers to make such an application and more importantly, can Malaysians trust a government-owned and operated facility?
With so much policing of internet users, the government is suffering from a trust deficiency.
Now that the government has prevailed over Meta, can it ensure the fair enforcement of laws instead of selectively prosecuting errant users? - Mkini
R NADESWARAN is a veteran journalist who writes on bread-and-butter issues. Comments: [email protected].
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

---