Tag: Recommendations

  • Meta’s content moderation changes closely align with FIRE recommendations

    Meta’s content moderation changes closely align with FIRE recommendations

    On Tuesday, Meta* CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Chief Global Affairs Officer Joel Kaplan announced sweeping changes to the content moderation policies at Meta (the owner of Facebook, Instagram, and Threads) with the stated intention of improving free speech and reducing “censorship” on its platforms. The changes simplify policies, replace the top-down fact-checking with a Community Notes-style system, reduce opportunities for false positives in automatic content flagging, and allow for greater user control of content feeds. All these changes mirror recommendations FIRE made in its May 2024 Report on Social Media.

    Given Meta’s platforms boast billions of users, the changes, if implemented, have major positive implications for free expression online.

    FIRE’s Social Media Report

    FIRE Report on Social Media 2024

    Reports

    With as many as 5.17 billion accounts worldwide, social media is the most powerful tool in history for average citizens to express themselves.


    Read More

    In our report, we promoted three principles to improve the state of free expression on social media:

    1. The law should require transparency whenever the government involves itself in social media moderation decisions.
    2. Content moderation policies should be transparent to users, who should be able to appeal moderation decisions that affect them.
    3. Content moderation decisions should be unbiased and should consistently apply the criteria that a platform’s terms of service establish.

    Principle 1 is the only one where FIRE believes government intervention is appropriate and constitutional (and we created a model bill to that effect). Principles 2 and 3 we hoped would enjoy voluntary adoption by social media platforms that wanted to promote freedom of expression. 

    While we don’t know whether these principles influenced Meta’s decision, we’re pleased the promised changes align very well with FIRE’s proposals for how a social media platform committed to free expression could put that commitment into practice.

    Meta’s changes to content moderation structures

    With a candid admission that it believes 10-20% of its millions of daily content removals are mistakes, Meta announced it is taking several actions to expand freedom of expression on the platform. The first is simplification and scaling back of its rules on the boundaries of discourse. According to Zuckerberg and Kaplan:

    [Meta is] getting rid of a number of restrictions on topics like immigration, gender identity and gender that are the subject of frequent political discourse and debate. It’s not right that things can be said on TV or the floor of Congress, but not on our platforms. These policy changes may take a few weeks to be fully implemented. 

    While this is promising in and of itself, it will be enhanced by a broad change to the automated systems for content moderation. Meta is restricting its automated flagging to only the most severe policy violations. For lesser policy violations, a user will have to manually report a post for review and possible removal. Additionally, any removal will require the agreement of multiple human reviewers.

    This is consistent with our argument that AI-driven and other automated flagging systems will invariably have issues with false-positives, making human review critical. Beyond removals, Meta is increasing the confidence threshold required for deboosting a post suspected of violating policy.

    Who fact-checks the fact checkers?

    Replacing top-down fact-checking with a bottom-up approach based on X’s Community Notes feature may be just about the biggest change announced by Meta. As FIRE noted in the Social Media Report: 

    Mark Zuckerberg famously said he didn’t want Facebook to be the “arbiter of truth.” But, in effect, through choosing a third-party fact checker, Facebook becomes the arbiter of the arbiter of truth. Given that users do not trust social media platforms, this is unlikely to engender trust in the accuracy of fact checks.

    Zuckerberg similarly said in the announcement that Meta’s“fact checkers have just been too politically biased, and have destroyed more trust than they’ve created.” 

    Our Social Media Report argued that the Community Notes feature is preferable to top-down fact-checking, because a community of diverse perspectives will likely be “less vulnerable to bias and easier for users to trust than top-down solutions that may reflect the biases of a much smaller number of stakeholders.” Additionally, we argued labeling is more supportive of free expression, being a “more speech” alternative to removal and deboosting.

    We are eager to see the results of this shift. At a minimum, experimentation and innovation in content moderation practices provides critical experience and data to guide future decisions and help platforms improve reliability, fairness, and responsiveness to users.

    User trust and the appearance of bias

    An overall theme in Zuckerberg and Kaplan’s remarks is that biased decision-making has eroded user trust in content moderation at Meta, and these policy changes are aimed at regaining users’ trust. As FIRE argued in our Social Media Report:

    In the case of moderating political speech, any platform that seeks to promote free expression should develop narrow, well-defined, and consistently enforceable rules to minimize the kind of subjectivity that leads to arbitrary and unfair enforcement practices that reduce users’ confidence both in platforms and in the state of free expression online.

    We also argued that perception of bias and flexibility in rules encourages powerful entities like government actors to “work the refs,” including through informal pressure, known as “jawboning.”

    What is jawboning? And does it violate the First Amendment?

    Issue Pages

    Indirect government censorship is still government censorship — and it must be stopped.


    Read More

    Additionally, when perceived bias drives users to small, ideologically homogeneous alternative platforms, the result can damage broader discourse:

    If users believe their “side” is censored unfairly, many will leave that platform for one where they believe they’ll have more of a fair shake. Because the exodus is ideological in nature, it will drive banned users to new platforms where they are exposed to fewer competing ideas, leading to “group polarization,” the well-documented phenomenon that like-minded groups become more extreme over time. Structures on all social media platforms contribute to polarization, but the homogeneity of alternative platforms turbocharges it.

    These are real problems, and it is not clear whether Meta’s plans will succeed in addressing them, but it is welcome to see them recognized.

    International threats to speech

    Our Social Media Report expressed concern that the Digital Services Act — the broad EU regulation mandating censorship on social media far beyond what U.S. constitutional law allows — would become a least common denominator approach for social media companies, even in the United States. Mark Zuckerberg seems to announce his intention to do no such thing, stating he planned to work with President Trump to push back on “governments around the world” that are “pushing [companies] to censor more.”

    While we are pleased at the implication that Meta’s platforms will seemingly not change their free expression policies in America at the behest of the EU, the invocation of a social media company working with any government, including the United States government, rings alarm bells for any civil libertarian. We will watch this development closely for that reason. 

    FIRE has often said — and it often bears repeating — the greatest threat to freedom of expression will always come from the government, and as Zuckerberg himself notes, the government has in years past pushed Meta to remove content.

    When the rubber meets the road

    Meta’s commitment to promote freedom of expression on its platforms offers plenty of reasons for cautious optimism. 

    But we do want to emphasize caution. There is, with free expression, often a large gap between stated intentions and what happens when theory meets practice. As a civil liberties watchdog, our duty is to measure promise against performance.

    Take, for example, our measured praise for Elon Musk’s stated commitment to free expression, followed by our frequent criticism when he failed to live up to that commitment. And that criticism hasn’t kept us from giving credit when due to X, such as when it adopted Community Notes. 

    Similarly, FIRE stands ready to help Meta live up to its stated commitments to free expression. You can be sure that we will watch closely and hold them accountable.

    * Meta has donated to FIRE.

    Source link

  • Recommendations for States to Address Postsecondary Affordability

    Recommendations for States to Address Postsecondary Affordability

    Authors: Lauren Asher, Nate Johnson, Marissa Molina, and Kristin D. Hultquist

    Source: HCM Strategists

    An October 2024 report, Beyond Sticker Prices: How States Can Make Postsecondary Education More Affordable, reviews data to evaluate affordability of postsecondary education across nine states, including Alabama, California, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Virginia, and Washington.

    The authors emphasize the importance of considering net price, or the full cost of attendance less total aid. Depending on the state, low-income students pay 16-27 percent of their total family income to attend community college.

    At public four-year colleges with high net prices, students with family income of $30,000-48,000 py more than half of their income (51-53 percent) for school in two of the nine states. Four-year colleges with low net prices show cost variability based on whether a student is the lowest income, earning $0-30,000, or has $30,000-48,000 in income. Students in the former group pay 21-27 percent of their family income toward education, while students in the latter group pay 40-41 percent of their income.

    The brief recommends that policymakers take the following issues into account:

    • The way states fund public institutions is critical for low-income students. Consider increasing funding for community colleges as well as evaluating how student income factors into allocation of state funds.
    • Tuition policy is integral to making decisions about postsecondary education. Public perception of college affordability is influenced by tuition costs. States have the power to set limits on how much institutions can raise or change costs, but states also must be careful not to limit institutions from charging what they require to adequately support students’ needs.
    • Transparency and consistency among financial aid programs increase their reach. States should consider making financial aid programs more readily understandable. State financial aid policies should also increase flexibility to adjust for transferring, length of time to graduate, and financial aid from other sources.
    • How states support basic needs affects students’ ability to afford attending college. Policies at the state level can offer students more options for paying for food, housing, caregiving, and more.

    To read the full report, click here.

    Kara Seidel


    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • HR Book Recommendations for Winter Break

    HR Book Recommendations for Winter Break

    by Julie Burrell | December 4, 2024

    The holiday break is a perfect time for leveling up your knowledge, igniting your HR spark, and collecting wisdom to share with your team. These book recommendations have been hand-picked by CUPA-HR colleagues for their insights into topics like change management, inclusion and belonging, and daring leadership. They make great team book club reads, too!

    Grab a warm beverage and cozy up with one of these HR reads.

    For bold leaders…

    Vulnerability might not spring to mind as the most important trait in a leader, but in Dare to Lead, Brené Brown encourages leaders to tune into their hearts as much as their minds.

    For the everyday superstar…

    In Hidden Potential, Adam Grant, a Wharton School of Business professor, says that we all have the ability to improve. You don’t have to be a prodigy or work yourself to the point of burnout, but instead be willing to learn and develop your character.

    For the inventor…   

    If you’ve ever pondered creative ways to do more with less, check out A Beautiful Constraint by Adam Morgan and Mark Barden. Jay Stephens, vice president of people and culture at the University of Montana, says “it’s a great book for higher ed, where we tend to live with a scarcity mindset.”

    For the team leader who’s always learning…

    The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni is a perennially popular book. Written in the form of a fable, it addresses some common team issues, like lack of trust, fear of conflict, and avoidance of accountability.

    For those looking to stress less…

    Jennifer Moss, a keynote speaker at the 2024 CUPA-HR Annual Conference and Expo, is a leading voice in fighting burnout. The Burnout Epidemic argues that organizations must take the lead in developing an anti-burnout strategy that moves beyond apps, wellness programs, and perks.

    For out-of-the-box thinkers…

    Miranda Arjona, assistant director of HR at Rollins College, encourages embracing the qualities that make children special (and that we tend to forget when we’re all grown up). Oh, the Places You’ll Go by Dr. Seuss “encourages readers to embrace new experiences, face obstacles with courage, and keep moving forward,” while Curious George by H.A. Rey and Margret Rey “emphasizes the importance of curiosity, exploration, and learning from one’s mistakes.” Winnie-the-Pooh by A.A. Milne “offers insights into the importance of enjoying the present moment, valuing simple pleasures, and appreciating the quirks of those around us.”

    Bonus tips for the book club leader (no required reading!)…

    As the content specialist in training and development, Corrie Grint hosts two different book clubs at the University of Utah. Here are her tips for success.

    • Vary book choices. Grint chooses a mix of classic leadership books, new and popular books, and untraditional books.
    • Build in flexible participation. Grint bases her questions on the general principles of books like Atomic Habits, “so anyone can participate, even if they haven’t read the book.”
    • Structure clubs inclusively. Participation is virtual and capped at one hour.
    • Offer pre-session and during-session support. A week before, Grant emails out other options to supplement or replace the reading, such as a book summary PDF or YouTube video. She also provides questions similar to the ones they’ll discuss. During the meeting, she provides a summary of the principles taught, along with quotes, and asks questions along the way.

     

    Here’s the full list of recommendations, chosen by CUPA-HR colleagues:

    An Astronaut’s Guide to Life on Earth: What Going to Space Taught Me About Ingenuity, Determination, and Being Prepared for Anything by Chris Hadfield

    Atomic Habits: An Easy and Proven Way to Build Good Habits and Break Bad Ones by James Clear

    A Beautiful Constraint: How To Transform Your Limitations Into Advantages, and Why It’s Everyone’s Business by Adam Morgan and Mark Barden

    Big Feelings: How to Be Okay When Things Are Not Okay by Liz Fosslien and Molly West Duffy

    The Burnout Epidemic: The Rise of Chronic Stress and How We Can Fix It by Jennifer Moss

    Career Self-Care: Find Your Happiness, Success, and Fulfillment at Work by Minda Zetlin

    Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When Stakes are High by Joseph Grenny and others

    Curious George by H.A. and Margaret Rey

    Dare to Lead: Brave Work. Tough Conversations. Whole Hearts. by Brené Brown

    Daring Greatly: How the Courage to Be Vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent, and Lead by Brené Brown

    Do Better: Spiritual Activism for Fighting and Healing from White Supremacy by Rachel Ricketts

    The Dream Manager: The Secret to Attracting, Engaging, and Retaining Talent by Matthew Kelly

    Emotional Intelligence 2.0 by Travis Bradberry and Jean Greaves

    Endurance: A Year in Space and a Lifetime of Discovery by Scott Kelly

    The Energy Bus: 10 Rules to Fuel Your Life, Work, and Team with Positive Energy by Jon Gordon

    First, Break All the Rules: What the World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently by Marcus Buckingham

    Fish!: A Proven Way to Boost Morale and Improve Results by Lundin, Christensen, and Paul

    The Five Dysfunctions of a Team: A Leadership Fable by Patrick M. Lencioni

    The 5 Languages of Appreciation in the Workplace: Empowering Organizations by Encouraging People by Gary Chapman and Paul White

    Ghost Soldiers: The Epic Account of World War II’s Greatest Rescue Mission by Hampton Sides

    Goodnight Moon by Margaret Wise Brown

    The Guide to Good Leading series by Ari Weinzweig

    Hidden Potential: The Science of Achieving Greater Things by Adam Grant

    HR on Purpose: Developing Deliberate People Passion by Steve Browne

    I’m No Philosopher, But I Got Thoughts: Mini-Meditations for Saints, Sinners, and the Rest of Us by Kristen Chenoweth

    Invisible Women: Data Bias in a World Designed for Men by Caroline Criado-Perez

    Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption by Bryan Stevenson

    Leadership and Self-Deception, Fourth Edition: The Secret to Transforming Relationships and Unleashing Results by The Arbinger Institute

    The Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up: The Japanese Art of Decluttering and Organizing by Marie Kondo

    The Long-Distance Teammate: Stay Engaged and Connected While Working Anywhere by Kevin Eikenberry and Wayne Turmel

    Managing Transitions: Making the Most of Change by William Bridges

    No Ego: How Leaders Can Cut the Cost of Workplace Drama, End Entitlement, and Drive Big Results by Cy Wakeman

    Oh, the Places You’ll Go! by Dr. Seuss

    The Outward Mindset: Seeing Beyond Ourselves by The Arbinger Institute

    Own Your Own Work Journey! The Path to Meaningful Work and Happiness in the Age of Smart Technology and Radical Change by Edward D. Hess

    The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business by Charles Duhigg

    Radical Candor: Be a Kick-Ass Boss Without Losing Your Humanity by Kim Scott

    Set Boundaries, Find Peace: A Guide to Reclaiming Yourself by Nedra Glover Tawwab

    The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People by Stephen R. Covey

    Smart Brevity: The Power of Saying More with Less by Jim VandeHei and others

    Supercommunicators: How to Unlock the Secret Language of Connection by Charles Duhigg

    Thanks for the Feedback: The Science and Art of Receiving Feedback Well by Douglas Stone and Sheila Heen

    Think Again: The Power of Knowing What You Don’t Know by Adam Grant

    Unreasonable Hospitality: The Remarkable Power of Giving People More Than They Expect by Will Guidara

    When Everyone Leads: How The Toughest Challenges Get Seen and Solved by Ed O’Malley and Julia Fabris McBride

    Who Moved My Cheese? by Spencer Johnson

    Winnie-the-Pooh by A. A. Milne



    Source link

  • Some finance recommendations for activists

    Some finance recommendations for activists

    I have seen some confusions recently on twitter regarding university finances. Here are four recommendations:

    1. Avoid using sector aggregate figures to make your arguments
      The sector is very uneven both in terms of size of institutions and in financial performance, make sure you are familiar with your institution and how it fits into the sector.
    2. Avoid using figures for “reserves” when you mean cash
      In accounting terms, “reserves” does not mean cash. Cash is included in reserves but that is because reserves names the excess of assets over liabilities: that the institution owns more than it owes. If it didn’t have reserves it would be insolvent. But its assets include buildings and land, which can dominate the reserves figure.
      It is a confusion that crops up regularly and is often associated with right-wing arguments about the sector being “awash with cash”. If you want to talk about cash, use the figures for cash – but bear in mind that it is good management to hold significant levels of cash or other liquid assets to manage the day-to-day running of the organisation. Universities are large and have large outgoings!
    3. Revolving Credit Facilities (RCFs) are like overdrafts …
      If you have one, you aren’t necessarily planning to use it.
      It provides extra headroom or is there for an emergency. Universities might simply be using it in their “liquidity” calculations to assure OfS that they have sufficient resources to cover 30 days of expenditure – falling below that level is a “reportable event” – and never intend to use it.
      That your institution negotiated one, but haven’t used it, is not per se a sign of bad management.
    4. Avoid confusing one-off costs with recurrent costs
      There is a clear difference between spending £1million on a one-off purchase and an annual outgoing of £1million.
      Your management may not always present the difference between such items in a very clear way, particularly when they have a certain narrative they wish to present or when they need to hit targets or covenants.
      One to be wary of is “vacancy savings”. Are these higher because of a recruitment freeze? Are these one-offs or recurrent savings? Technically, the former; they would only become recurrent savings, if the posts are made redundant.
      A management highlighting a certain level of vacancy savings may want to convey discipline to governors or lenders, but it can mask issues of sustainability: it isn’t a way to address persistent deficits. If there is an underlying deficit of, say, £2million, you shouldn’t be confident because they covered that through a recruitment freeze this year. And that’s solely from the numbers perspective: before you consider the implications for workload …

    There are a few resources on this site for thinking about university finances. There is also a blog and recorded seminar for UCU on getting started with university accounts and “challenging the financial narrative”.

    If you want more help, please get in touch.

    I have worked with more than 40 UCU branches over the last few years to help with negotiations. Get in touch for details.

    A testimonial:




    Source link