Facebook’s recent removal of dummy accounts allegedly linked to the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) has become another hot topic among lawmakers, experts, advocacy groups, and the general public.
But instead of simply contributing another hot take to the matter, let’s focus on the technicality that Facebook presents as the basis on its decision to take down these accounts and pages.
In recent reports, the term “coordinated inauthentic behavior” (CIB) has been repeatedly mentioned, but what does it mean? Let’s explore the term according to Facebook’s definition.
Facebook defines CIB as “coordinated efforts to manipulate public debate for a strategic goal where fake accounts are central to the operation.”
In this case, the social media giant looks for certain networks of people who use the platform via fake user accounts, focusing on “behavior” and not just “content.”
This means that Facebook keeps an eye more on activities that may deem suspiciously sophisticated or organized, not only on what they post or who’s behind them.
Facebook divides CIB into two categories: domestic, non-government campaigns, and foreign or government interference (FGI).
Examples of domestic, non-government campaigns include the accounts and pages removed by Facebook backed by marketing firms within countries such as Nigeria, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
CIB that falls under FGI, on the other hand, coordinates efforts on behalf of a government entity or a foreign actor. An example of this is the recently removed accounts and pages allegedly linked to the Philippine military and police.
Facebook’s concept of CIB is still evolving as fraudulent activities on social media progress. The social media giant relies on both manual and AI-based technology to identify and track these activities. This proves that Facebook is making extraneous efforts to control the damage caused by mass deception and manipulation.