Meta's logo is seen on a sign at the company's headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif., Nov. 9, 2022. A lawsuit filed Wednesday, May 1, 2024, against Facebook parent Meta Platforms Inc. is arguing that a federal law often used to shield internet companies from liability also allows people to use external tools to take control of their feed — even if that means shutting it off entirely. The Canadian Press
A legal battle is brewing over social media users' autonomy to curate their online experience. Meta Platforms Inc., the parent company of Facebook, is facing a lawsuit challenging users' rights to control the content displayed on their feeds, including the option to shut it down completely using external tools.
The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University has taken legal action against Meta Platforms on behalf of a professor from Amherst. The professor seeks to introduce a tool named Unfollow Everything 2.0, designed to allow users to unfollow friends, groups, and pages on Facebook and clear their newsfeed of its continuous stream of posts, photos, and videos. The underlying idea is to reduce reliance on the platform by minimizing exposure to addictive content. However, Meta, historically reluctant to endorse such endeavors, is likely to oppose it.
Previously, a U.K. developer named Luis Barclay faced repercussions for creating a similar tool, Unfollow Everything, prompting its removal and his permanent ban from Facebook due to legal threats.
Ethan Zuckerman, the Amherst professor involved in the current lawsuit, emphasizes the need for users to have more control over their social media experience. He argues that users currently have minimal control over platform functionalities compared to other internet services like email, which offer various client options and anti-tracking features.
Meta declined to provide a comment on the matter.
The lawsuit revolves around a provision in Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which typically shields internet companies from liability for content posted on their platforms. However, a separate clause grants immunity to software developers who create tools enabling users to filter objectionable content. The lawsuit thus raises the question of whether users have the right to filter out objectionable content, including their news feeds, on social media platforms.
Zuckerman believes that establishing this right could pave the way for new research and development aimed at improving users' social media experiences.
While Facebook does offer a manual unfollow option, it becomes impractical for users with extensive networks. Zuckerman intends to study how disabling the news feed impacts users' engagement on the platform, with participation being voluntary.
Ramya Krishnan, a senior staff attorney at the Knight Institute, asserts users' entitlement to control their social media experience, citing the same statute that shields Meta from user-generated content liability as granting users the authority to dictate their platform interactions.
