A new framework for online content moderation - ScienceDirect

This article argues that it is time judges move away from reviewing single instances of speech on the merits of content and turn to evaluating the procedural elements of content moderation systems created and managed by platforms. If a plaintiff sues the social media platform alleging they sustained immaterial damages due to a post by another person, as is possible in most countries, it is not sustainable for the judge to insist on the role of deciding whether that specific post caused harm and reply with an order of removal and financial compensation for damages. Rather, they should evaluate to what extent the private platform provided means for the plaintiff to reply online, to submit a complaint against the original post, one that is actually taken into account. Courts should check if the content moderation scheme set in place respects minimum due process rules, especially in legal systems where such constitutional rights bind private parties and not only the State.