Amnesty International denounces the responsibility of the Meta group, owner of the social network Facebook, in attacks on the rights of the Tigrayan community in Ethiopia. In a report published this Tuesday, October 31, the NGO affirms that the American multinational did not “adequately” limit the dissemination of hateful content during the war between the Popular Front for the Liberation of Tigray and the Ethiopian federal forces between 2020 and 2022.
2 mins
Facebook’s model, based on the logic of algorithms, is at issue according to Amnesty. This system configured to increase the use of the social network promotes the propagation of violent content, because it attracts the attention of Internet users. Facebook is widely used in Ethiopia. The network is seen by many users as a reliable source of information. However, during the conflict, algorithms reinforced the dissemination of hateful messages targeting the Tigrayan community.
The report traces the history of Meareg Amare. This Tigrayan chemistry professor was assassinated after his name, address and photo were posted on Facebook, with a threatening message accusing him of collaborating with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Tigray. In the midst of conflict, targeted threats of this kind have proliferated. For Amnesty, Facebook’s moderation system was faulty. The NGO notes reports of dangerous content not taken into account and a reaction time that is too slow.
Before and during the conflict, Meta received warnings from civil society organizations and human rights experts. “ Meta, however, did not take these warnings into consideration, and did not take the necessary mitigation measures, even after the outbreak of the conflict », denounces the secretary general of Amnesty International, Agnès Callamard. The NGO calls the Meta group to “ large-scale reforms » while the Amhara region, in northern Ethiopia, still faces a security crisis.
A collective complaint was filed in December 2022 against Meta, at the Facebook network regulation center in Nairobi. The plaintiffs accuse the company in particular of not having properly moderated the content broadcast in the Ethiopian language, in addition to having favored divisive and hateful speech.