Meta Ignores EU User-Ban Reviews in 4,600 Cases, Providing Evidence in Fewer Than 100
Updated
Updated · BBC.com · May 28
Meta Ignores EU User-Ban Reviews in 4,600 Cases, Providing Evidence in Fewer Than 100
3 articles · Updated · BBC.com · May 28
Appeals Centre Europe said Meta supplied reviewable evidence in fewer than 100 of more than 4,600 Facebook, Instagram and Threads account-ban disputes handled in the year to March 2026.
The EU dispute body said platforms must engage in good faith, but Meta was usually unable or unwilling to provide the underlying content needed to independently assess whether bans were justified.
72% of more than 10,000 total complaints sent to the centre lacked enough platform-provided material for review; in nearly 3,000 cases it could assess, it disagreed with platforms 59% of the time.
Hate-speech enforcement was a major weakness: the centre said platforms left up flagged hateful content in more than two-thirds of its decisions, including 83% of TikTok cases and 74% on Instagram.
The findings add to long-running user complaints about opaque account bans and patchy appeals, while the centre said it still lacks consistent data on whether platforms implement its nonbinding decisions.
Is Meta's defiance exposing the EU's flagship Digital Services Act as powerless?
If AI can't stop online hate, are social media platforms becoming ungovernable?
Is it now cheaper for Big Tech to pay EU fines than to protect its users?