Catastrophic effects of working as a Facebook moderator

[Doghouse Reilly]

Not long ago, a man kept sending me porn films. While I don't have an issue with porn (unless children are involved), but these showed brutality and were graphic and disgusting.

Where were these guys? It took some time after I reported the guy to FB, but I know he wasn't banned, and he actually sent me a friendship request afterwards.

Why didn't you just block him? Why do people think it's the job of Facebook to do all the moderating? It's extremely simple to block people who are doing things you find objectionable.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Why just the exposure? Following that reasoning, why not think of ways to equally share in the actual suffering itself?

And incidentally: Do you think of society in terms of your country? If not, then there'll be lots of suffering to share in, if you've a mind to take it on.

I'm open to the idea.

 

[wasapi]

Why didn't you just block him? Why do people think it's the job of Facebook to do all the moderating? It's extremely simple to block people who are doing things you find objectionable.

I did block him and continued to block him 5 more times, he kept finding a way to still send me more pornography, right after banning him.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

From The Guardian:

Revealed: catastrophic effects of working as a Facebook moderator



Worth clicking through for the full article. It's pretty disturbing.

One approach Facebook could take is remove itself from the business of moderating content. Make it easy for users to block other users and websites or even broad categories of content they find offensive and let individuals sort it out among themselves. Facebook is not held responsible if a terrorist attack was organized on its platform any more than AT&T is held responsible if the terrorists used the telephone. There's really no reason for Facebook to decide what is OK for you to see.

If Facebook wants to assume responsibility for users by moderating content, then they shouldn't hire people who have weak constitutions. Any law enforcement officer who volunteers to join the child sex crimes unit knows they might be exposed to disturbing material. Similarly, a Facebook moderator shouldn't be shocked--shocked I tell you--by being exposed to Black men sending dickpicts to underage girls.

 

[Elagabalus]

One approach Facebook could take is remove itself from the business of moderating content. Make it easy for users to block other users and websites or even broad categories of content they find offensive and let individuals sort it out among themselves. Facebook is not held responsible if a terrorist attack was organized on its platform any more than AT&T is held responsible if the terrorists used the telephone. There's really no reason for Facebook to decide what is OK for you to see.

If Facebook wants to assume responsibility for users by moderating content, then they shouldn't hire people who have weak constitutions. Any law enforcement officer who volunteers to join the child sex crimes unit knows they might be exposed to disturbing material. Similarly, a Facebook moderator shouldn't be shocked--shocked I tell you--by being exposed to Black men sending dickpicts to underage girls.

But White men are totally OK?

 

[Information Analyst]

From The Guardian:

Revealed: catastrophic effects of working as a Facebook moderator

Worth clicking through for the full article. It's pretty disturbing.

Hardly surprising, given that trained police officers have fallen into a similar trap. In the UK there have been moves to use AI to assess and cross-reference suspect videos, rather than having officers trawl through them.