To start, defining who should or shouldn’t be on a list gets complicated fast.
For instance, the Board, in its analysis, says Meta should do more to “prioritize expression that is important for human rights, including expression which is of special public importance.” Meta is criticized for not having a “comprehensive system in place to systematically assess which journalists, human rights defenders or civil society figures in a particular geography should be subject to ERSR.”
Yeah – that’s because not only defining who a journalist is, let alone the real security risks of Meta having a clean taxonomy of journalists and activists worldwide. While I understand that the Board doesn’t see it as part of their job to write policies, I wish they gave a little more guidance on how they would want Meta to define and find who these people are. An opt-in system would help some – but you still need a way to confirm that the people asking for protection should get protection and ensure you are covering those who may not realize they can request it.
We ran into the same problem in defining who a politician is. Let’s create a list of every politician and government page worldwide. Sounds so simple at first blush, right? Surely someone has built this. Nope. They still haven’t.