Social media giant rejects criticism it didn’t do enough to take down false content and doesn’t want to be ‘arbiter of truth’

Facebook has revealed it removed two instances of “coordinated inauthentic behaviour” on its platform during the Australian federal election in May, but insists it does not want to be the arbiter of truth, or to “referee political debates”.

The social media giant has used its submission to the joint committee on electoral matters to stoutly defend its role in the 2019 election campaign after Labor has appealed to the same committee to investigate whether the digital behemoths are having a negative impact on Australian democracy.

The joint parliamentary committee on electoral matters examines the conduct of every federal election. Facebook argues in its submission it took action to remove “coordinated inauthentic behaviour, the term we use to describe groups of pages or people that work together to mislead others about who they are or what they are doing”. It confirmed it removed two instances of such activity during the Australian election.

Labor calls for Facebook investigation after 'death tax' election campaign Read more

But it has rejected arguments from Labor and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission that it didn’t do enough to remove death tax content – claims proliferating on the platform that Bill Shorten would introduce a death tax if Labor won. The content was deemed false by the platform’s third-party factcheckers, and demoted in the newsfeed, but not removed.

Facebook says most of the discussion about inheritance taxes during the election came from “ordinary Australians expressing their personal opinions or from elected politicians or political parties”.

“Facebook does not believe that it’s an appropriate role for us to be the arbiter of truth over content shared by ordinary Australians or to referee political debates and prevent a politician’s speech from reaching its audience and being subject to public debate and scrutiny.”

While arguing it does not want to exercise the traditional editorial responsibility of a publisher, it contends it is committed to taking action against misinformation. “We are committed to fighting the spread of misinformation and we have adopted an approach that aims to address misinformation, while encouraging free expression.”

The platform says as part of efforts to combat foreign interference in the Australian contest, it temporarily restricted political or electoral ads purchased from outside Australia ahead of the election in April and May. “As part of this ban, we did not allow foreign ads that include political slogans and party logos.”

It also told the committee it removed 2.2bn fake accounts between January and March 2019, and “the majority of these accounts were caught within minutes of registration”.

UK queries Facebook decision to exempt political statements from fact-checking Read more

Guardian Australia revealed last month the ALP has used its post-election submission to the committee to call for an examination of whether Australian elections are vulnerable to influence by “malinformation” – a term invoked by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in its landmark digital platforms review.

In an interview with Guardian Australia in August, the ACCC chairman, Rod Sims, blasted Facebook’s practices, and said the social media giant should have removed the bogus death tax claims given its own independent factchecking processes had found the material to be false.

Sims said Facebook had the capability to deal with the proliferation of fake news on the platform, but the social media behemoth is instead “palming off responsibility” to protect its bottom line.

The industry body representing Google, Facebook and Twitter has already rejected the ACCC’s proposal for an industry code of conduct to fight fake news, warning that the recommendation would turn Australia’s media regulator into the truth police.

The Liberal party doesn’t reference the debate about digital misinformation in its submission to the parliamentary committee, but it does flag irregularities with voting.

The submission from the Liberal party’s federal director, Andrew Hirst, notes there has been a practice of people being marked off the electoral roll more than once. Hirst calls on the committee to consider measures to ensure “the highest levels of integrity in our elections, including requirements for voter identification”.

The Liberals are also troubled by the increase in pre-poll voting, and Hirst calls for it to be wound back. Hirst says Australians are now being “incentivised to vote early” and asks the committee to consider the reality that Australia now has a “voting period”, as opposed to an “election day”.

Vast majority of Australians support ban on misleading political advertising Read more

“Millions of Australians are now voting when many key aspects of an Australian election campaign – such as the release of major policies, campaign launches, leaders’ debates, and ‘free-time’ election broadcasts – have not yet taken place.”

Hirst recommends limiting voting at pre-poll voting centres to a two-week period and returning the number of the pre-poll voting centres to 2013 levels.

He also condemns “appalling and illegal behaviour that took place during the election campaign, including damage to property and abuse being directed towards parliamentarians, candidates, campaign staff and party volunteers”.

“The most extreme examples included anti-Semitic vandalism directed towards the member for Berowra and the federal treasurer, damage to Liberal Party vehicles, obscene personal abuse directed towards the former prime minister Tony Abbott, and a campaign volunteer being stabbed with a corkscrew.”