<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">digitallaw</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">Journal of Digital Technologies and Law</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Journal of Digital Technologies and Law</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2949-2483</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Kazan Innovative University named after V. G. Timiryasov</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.21202/jdtl.2023.26</article-id><article-id custom-type="edn" pub-id-type="custom">xoftaw</article-id><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">digitallaw-235</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>ARTICLES</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>СТАТЬИ</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>“Pure Rat Country” – Reflections on Case Decision 2022-001-FB-UA of Facebook Oversight Board (Knin Cartoon Case)</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>«Чисто крысиная страна» – размышления о решении по делу 2022-001-FB-UA Наблюдательного совета Фейсбука (Дело мультфильма о городе Книн)</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3298-8087</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Лендваи</surname><given-names>Г. Ф.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Lendvai</surname><given-names>G. F.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Гергели Ференц Лендваи – доктор права, докторант</p><p>Web of Science Researcher ID: <ext-link xlink:href="https://www.webofscience.com/wos/author/record/ISU-4560-2023" ext-link-type="uri">https://www.webofscience.com/wos/author/record/ISU-4560-2023 </ext-link></p><p>Google Scholar ID: <ext-link xlink:href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=CVKzt1AAAAAJ" ext-link-type="uri">https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=CVKzt1AAAAAJ</ext-link></p><p>г. Будапешт, улица Хаттью, 17</p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Gergely Ferenc Lendvai – Juris Doctor, dr. and Pázmány Péter Catholic University (PhD candidate)</p><p>Web of Science Researcher ID: <ext-link xlink:href="https://www.webofscience.com/wos/author/record/ISU-4560-2023" ext-link-type="uri">https://www.webofscience.com/wos/author/record/ISU-4560-2023 </ext-link></p><p>Google Scholar ID: <ext-link xlink:href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=CVKzt1AAAAAJ" ext-link-type="uri">https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=CVKzt1AAAAAJ</ext-link></p><p>Hattyú utca 17, Budapest</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">lendvaigergely@me.com</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff-1"><aff xml:lang="ru"><institution>Католический университет Петера Пазманя</institution><country>Венгрия</country></aff><aff xml:lang="en"><institution>Pázmány Péter Catholic University</institution><country>Hungary</country></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2023</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>20</day><month>08</month><year>2023</year></pub-date><volume>1</volume><issue>3</issue><fpage>612</fpage><lpage>628</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Lendvai G., 2023</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2023</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Лендваи Г.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Lendvai G.</copyright-holder><license xml:lang="ru" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.</license-p></license><license xml:lang="en" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://www.lawjournal.digital/jour/article/view/235">https://www.lawjournal.digital/jour/article/view/235</self-uri><abstract><sec><title>Objective</title><p>Objective: the present paper aims to analyse Case Decision 2022-001-FB-UA of Facebook Oversight Board, also known as the Knin cartoon case and attempts to put the case as well as its procedure in a historical and cultural context to set out a critical approach concerning Facebook’s content moderation.</p></sec><sec><title>Methods</title><p>Methods: the paper uses desk research as the primary source of method. The paper’s resource background builds upon comparative case studies and case analysis as well. The paper uses resources from various disciplines: legal philosophy, international law, media law, platform regulation, history.</p></sec><sec><title>Results</title><p>Results: the paper presents the context of the Knin cartoon case as well as the key findings of the Oversight Board and the reasoning behind its decision. Furthermore, this paper aims to reflect on the idea of hate speech as interpreted by the Oversight Board and makes a tentative to contextualise and introduce the main problems and possible solutions regarding Meta’s content moderation in the scope of the present case.</p></sec><sec><title>Scientific novelty</title><p>Scientific novelty: the Knin case has not been analysed in such historical and contextual depth before as the case decision was issued in 2022. Only a few analyses from merely legal standpoints were published thus far.</p></sec><sec><title>Practical significance</title><p>Practical significance: the findings regarding the Knin case may be of importance of three main aspects: (1) it could be used for further critical analyses on Facebook’s content moderation, (2) it could serve as a recommendation regarding platform regulation and guideline development and (3) it presents the paramount relevance and significance of the holistic interpretational perspectives when determining hate speech. As for the latter the present paper argues that the historical, cultural, societal and symbolic interpretation and understanding of hate speech determination is not only instrumental, but the only viable method to understand, determine and judge upon alleged hate speech cases.</p></sec></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="ru"><sec><title>Цель</title><p>Цель: в работе представлен анализ решения Наблюдательного совета Фейсбука по делу 2022-001-FB-UA, известному как «Дело мультфильма о городе Книн». Цель исследования – определение места данного дела в историческом и культурном контексте и выработка критического подхода к проблеме модерирования контента в компании «Фейсбук».</p></sec><sec><title>Методы</title><p>Методы: основным методом, используемым в работе, является изучение источников. Исследование опирается на сравнительное изучение и анализ кейсов. Использованы положения различных дисциплин, таких как философия права, международное право, право в области средств массовой информации, регулирование деятельности платформ, история.</p></sec><sec><title>Результаты</title><p>Результаты: в работе представлен контекст дела мультфильма о городе Книн и основные решения Наблюдательного совета Фейсбука с их обоснованиями. Кроме того, отражена концепция языка ненависти в понимании Наблюдательного совета и сделана попытка показать контекст и описать основные проблемы и возможные решения в области модерирования контента в компании Мета на примере данного дела.</p></sec><sec><title>Научная новизна</title><p>Научная новизна: с момента опубликования решения по делу мультфильма о городе Книн в 2022 г. он не подвергался глубокому историческому и контекстуальному анализу. До настоящего времени вышли лишь несколько работ, анализирующих его с юридической точки зрения.</p></sec><sec><title>Практическая значимость</title><p>Практическая значимость: полученные результаты важны в трех основных аспектах: (1) они могут быть использованы для дальнейшего критического анализа модерирования контента в компании «Фейсбук», (2) они могут служить в качестве рекомендаций в области регулирования деятельности платформ и разработки инструкций и (3) они показывают исключительную актуальность и важность целостного подхода к определению языка ненависти. В рамках последнего аспекта работа доказывает, что историческая, культурная, общественная и символическая интерпретация и понимание проблемы определения языка ненависти является не только практически применимым, но и единственным целесообразным методом для распознавания, определения и вынесения суждения о предполагаемом использовании языка ненависти.</p></sec></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>Мета</kwd><kwd>мультфильм о городе Книн</kwd><kwd>Наблюдательный совет</kwd><kwd>права человека</kwd><kwd>право</kwd><kwd>регулирование</kwd><kwd>свобода выражения мнения</kwd><kwd>Фейсбук</kwd><kwd>цифровые технологии</kwd><kwd>язык ненависти</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>Digital technologies</kwd><kwd>Facebook</kwd><kwd>freedom of expression</kwd><kwd>hate speech</kwd><kwd>human rights</kwd><kwd>knin cartoon</kwd><kwd>law</kwd><kwd>Meta</kwd><kwd>oversight board</kwd><kwd>regulation</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Arun, Ch. (2021). Facebook’s Faces. Harvard Law Review Forum, 135, 22–37. Balkin, J. M. (2018). Free Speech is a Triangle. Columbia Law Review, 118, 12–20.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Arun, Ch. (2021). Facebook’s Faces. Harvard Law Review Forum, 135, 22–37. Balkin, J. M. (2018). Free Speech is a Triangle. Columbia Law Review, 118, 12–20.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Banjeglav, T. (2015). A Storm of Memory in Post-War Croatia. Cultures of History Forum, 4, 34–39.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Banjeglav, T. (2015). A Storm of Memory in Post-War Croatia. Cultures of History Forum, 4, 34–39.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Bayer, J. (2021). Rights and Duties of Online Platforms. In J. Bayer, B. Holznagel, P. Korpisaari, L. Woods (Eds.). Perspectives on Platform Regulation: Concepts and Models of Social Media Governance Across the Globe. Baden-Baden, Nomos–Digitalization and the Law. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.298</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Bayer, J. (2021). Rights and Duties of Online Platforms. In J. Bayer, B. Holznagel, P. Korpisaari, L. Woods (Eds.). Perspectives on Platform Regulation: Concepts and Models of Social Media Governance Across the Globe. Baden-Baden, Nomos–Digitalization and the Law. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.298</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Bayer, J. (2022). A Facebook Ellenőrző Bizottság mint alternatív vitarendező szerv. Fundamentum, 3, 5–16.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Bayer, J. (2022). A Facebook Ellenőrző Bizottság mint alternatív vitarendező szerv. Fundamentum, 3, 5–16.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Benesch, S. (2020). But Facebook’s Not a Country: How to Interpret Human Rights Law for Social Media Companies. Yale Journal on Regulation Online Bulletin, 38, 71–86.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Benesch, S. (2020). But Facebook’s Not a Country: How to Interpret Human Rights Law for Social Media Companies. Yale Journal on Regulation Online Bulletin, 38, 71–86.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Chander, A. (2012). Facebookistan. North Carolina Law Review, 90(5), 56–61.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Chander, A. (2012). Facebookistan. North Carolina Law Review, 90(5), 56–61.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Cowls, J-D., &amp; Dominiquo-Schramm, M. (2022). Constitutional Metaphors: Facebook’s ‘Supreme Court’ and the Legitimation of Platform Governance. New Media &amp; Society, 3, 23346. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221085559</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Cowls, J-D., &amp; Dominiquo-Schramm, M. (2022). Constitutional Metaphors: Facebook’s ‘Supreme Court’ and the Legitimation of Platform Governance. New Media &amp; Society, 3, 23346. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221085559</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Douek, E. (2019). Facebook’s, Oversight Board: Move Fast with Stable Infrastructure and Humility. North Carolina Journal of Law and Technology, 21, 123–130.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Douek, E. (2019). Facebook’s, Oversight Board: Move Fast with Stable Infrastructure and Humility. North Carolina Journal of Law and Technology, 21, 123–130.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Douek, E. (2020). What Kind of Oversight Board Have You Given Us. The University of Chicago Law Review Online, 23, 45–59.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Douek, E. (2020). What Kind of Oversight Board Have You Given Us. The University of Chicago Law Review Online, 23, 45–59.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Douek, E. (2021). Governing Online Speech. Columbia Law Review, 121(3), 34456.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Douek, E. (2021). Governing Online Speech. Columbia Law Review, 121(3), 34456.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Douek, E. (2022). The Siren Call of Content Moderation Formalism. In L. Bollinger, G. Stone (Eds.). Social Media, Freedom of Speech, and the Future of our Democracy. Oxford, Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197621080.003.0009</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Douek, E. (2022). The Siren Call of Content Moderation Formalism. In L. Bollinger, G. Stone (Eds.). Social Media, Freedom of Speech, and the Future of our Democracy. Oxford, Oxford University Press. https://doi. org/10.1093/oso/9780197621080.003.0009</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Dvoskin, B. (2022). Expert Governance of Online Speech. Harvard International Law Journal, 63, forthcoming.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Dvoskin, B. (2022). Expert Governance of Online Speech. Harvard International Law Journal, 63, forthcoming.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Elkin-Koren, N., &amp; Perel, M. (2020). Separation of Functions for AI: Restraining Speech Regulation by Online Platforms. Lewis &amp; Clark Law Review, 24(3), n.pag. https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3439261</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Elkin-Koren, N., &amp; Perel, M. (2020). Separation of Functions for AI: Restraining Speech Regulation by Online Platforms. Lewis &amp; Clark Law Review, 24(3), n.pag. https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3439261</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit14"><label>14</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Frazier, K. (2021) Why Meta Users Need a Public Advocate: a Modest Means to Address the Shortcomings of the Oversight Board. Richmond Journal of Law &amp; Technology, XXVIII(3), 596–622.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Frazier, K. (2021) Why Meta Users Need a Public Advocate: a Modest Means to Address the Shortcomings of the Oversight Board. Richmond Journal of Law &amp; Technology, XXVIII(3), 596–622.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit15"><label>15</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Goldman, E., &amp; Miers, J. (2021). Online Account Terminations/Content Removals and the Benefits of Internet Services Enforcing Their House Rules. Journal of Free Speech Law, 1, 192–225.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Goldman, E., &amp; Miers, J. (2021). Online Account Terminations/Content Removals and the Benefits of Internet Services Enforcing Their House Rules. Journal of Free Speech Law, 1, 192–225.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit16"><label>16</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Gorwa, R. (2019). The platform governance triangle: conceptualising the informal regulation of online content. Internet Policy Review, 8, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.2.1407</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Gorwa, R. (2019). The platform governance triangle: conceptualising the informal regulation of online content. Internet Policy Review, 8, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.2.1407</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit17"><label>17</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Helfer, L. R., &amp; Land, M. K. (2022). The Facebook Oversight Board’s Human Rights Future. Cardozo Law Review, 44(6), 1–70.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Helfer, L. R., &amp; Land, M. K. (2022). The Facebook Oversight Board’s Human Rights Future. Cardozo Law Review, 44(6), 1–70.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit18"><label>18</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Klonick, K. (2020). The Facebook Oversight Board: Creating an Independent Institution to Adjudicate Online Free Expression. The Yale Law Journal, 129, 2418.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Klonick, K. (2020). The Facebook Oversight Board: Creating an Independent Institution to Adjudicate Online Free Expression. The Yale Law Journal, 129, 2418.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit19"><label>19</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Kulick, A. (2022). Corporations as Interpreters and Adjudicators of International Human Rights Norms – Meta‘s Oversight Board and Beyond. The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, 5, 8–17.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kulick, A. (2022). Corporations as Interpreters and Adjudicators of International Human Rights Norms – Meta‘s Oversight Board and Beyond. The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, 5, 8–17.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit20"><label>20</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Leutloff-Grandits, C. (2008). Claiming in Postwar Croatia: The Dynamics of Property Relations and Ethnic Conflict in the Knin Region. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21(1), 34–45. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fen004</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Leutloff-Grandits, C. (2008). Claiming in Postwar Croatia: The Dynamics of Property Relations and Ethnic Conflict in the Knin Region. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21(1), 34–45. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fen004</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit21"><label>21</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Medzini, R. (2022). Enhanced self-regulation: The case of Facebook’s content governance. New Media &amp; Society, 24(10), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444821989352</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Medzini, R. (2022). Enhanced self-regulation: The case of Facebook’s content governance. New Media &amp; Society, 24(10), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444821989352</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit22"><label>22</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Melichárek, M. (2015). Národná symbolika a mýtus v srbských vojenských piesňach z obdobia r. 1991–1995. Porta Balkanica, 7(2), 25–34.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Melichárek, M. (2015). Národná symbolika a mýtus v srbských vojenských piesňach z obdobia r. 1991–1995. Porta Balkanica, 7(2), 25–34.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit23"><label>23</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Nunziato, D. C. (2022). Protecting Free Speech and Due Process Values on Dominant Social Media Platforms. Hastings Law Journal, 73(5), 1255.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Nunziato, D. C. (2022). Protecting Free Speech and Due Process Values on Dominant Social Media Platforms. Hastings Law Journal, 73(5), 1255.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit24"><label>24</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">O’Kane, R. (2022). Meta’s Private Speech Governance and the Role of the Oversight Board: Lessons from the Board’s First Decisions. Stanford Technology Law Review, 25(2), 167–209.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">O’Kane, R. (2022). Meta’s Private Speech Governance and the Role of the Oversight Board: Lessons from the Board’s First Decisions. Stanford Technology Law Review, 25(2), 167–209.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit25"><label>25</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Pickup, E. L. (2021). The Oversight Board’s Dormant Power to Review Facebook’s Algorithms. Yale Journal on Regulation Bulletin, 39(1), 2–21.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Pickup, E. L. (2021). The Oversight Board’s Dormant Power to Review Facebook’s Algorithms. Yale Journal on Regulation Bulletin, 39(1), 2–21.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit26"><label>26</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Pongó, T. (2020). Új Korszak Az Online Véleménynyilvánítás Korlátozásában? Gondolatok a Facebook Oversight Board működéséről. Iustum Aequum Salutare, XVI(4), 147–162.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Pongó, T. (2020). Új Korszak Az Online Véleménynyilvánítás Korlátozásában? Gondolatok a Facebook Oversight Board működéséről. Iustum Aequum Salutare, XVI(4), 147–162.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit27"><label>27</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ramet, S. P. (2011). Serbia and the Serbs in World War Two. Berlin, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230347816</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ramet, S. P. (2011). Serbia and the Serbs in World War Two. Berlin, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230347816</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit28"><label>28</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Robionek, B. (2017). Musik als Transportmittel für Ideologie. In K., Bozay, D. Borstel (Eds.). Ungleichwertigkeitsideologien in der Einwanderungsgesellschaft. Wiesbaden, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-14245-2_14</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Robionek, B. (2017). Musik als Transportmittel für Ideologie. In K., Bozay, D. Borstel (Eds.). Ungleichwertigkeitsideologien in der Einwanderungsgesellschaft. Wiesbaden, Springer. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-658-14245-2_14</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit29"><label>29</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Rogoff, Z. (2019). Five Free Expression Safeguards from a Facebook User’s Perspective. TPRC47: Research Conference on Communications, Information and Internet Policy. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3428062</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Rogoff, Z. (2019). Five Free Expression Safeguards from a Facebook User’s Perspective. TPRC47: Research Conference on Communications, Information and Internet Policy. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3428062</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit30"><label>30</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Sale, H. A. (2022). Monitoring Facebook. Harvard Business Law Review, 12. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4213540</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Sale, H. A. (2022). Monitoring Facebook. Harvard Business Law Review, 12. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4213540</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit31"><label>31</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Schultz, M. (2021). Six Problems with Facebook’s Oversight Board. In J. Bayer, B. Holznagel, P. Korpisaari, &amp; L. Woods (Eds.), Perspectives on Platform Regulation: Concepts and Models of Social Media Governance Across the Globe. Baden-Baden, Nomos. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783748929789-145</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Schultz, M. (2021). Six Problems with Facebook’s Oversight Board. In J. Bayer, B. Holznagel, P. Korpisaari, &amp; L. Woods (Eds.), Perspectives on Platform Regulation: Concepts and Models of Social Media Governance Across the Globe. Baden-Baden, Nomos. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783748929789-145</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit32"><label>32</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Singleton, F. Hinds, L. A., Krebs, Ch., &amp; Spratt, D. M. (2003). Rats, mice and people: rodent biology and management. Canberra, Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Singleton, F. Hinds, L. A., Krebs, Ch., &amp; Spratt, D. M. (2003). Rats, mice and people: rodent biology and management. Canberra, Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit33"><label>33</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Takhshid, Z. (2021). Regulating Social Media in the Global South. Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment &amp; Technology Law, 24(1), 1–55.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Takhshid, Z. (2021). Regulating Social Media in the Global South. Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment &amp; Technology Law, 24(1), 1–55.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit34"><label>34</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Vukčević, I. (2021). Facebook Oversight Board’s Decision on the Indefinite Suspension of Donald Trump’s Account. Pravni Zapisi, 12(1), 295–311. https://doi.org/10.5937/pravzap0-32521</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Vukčević, I. (2021). Facebook Oversight Board’s Decision on the Indefinite Suspension of Donald Trump’s Account. Pravni Zapisi, 12(1), 295–311. https://doi.org/10.5937/pravzap0-32521</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit35"><label>35</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Wong, D., &amp; Floridi, L. (2022). Meta’s Oversight Board: A Review and Critical Assessment, Minds and Machines. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-022-09613-x</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Wong, D., &amp; Floridi, L. (2022). Meta’s Oversight Board: A Review and Critical Assessment, Minds and Machines. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-022-09613-x</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
