What changes can we expect from the platforms without Roe v. Wade precedent?
Introduction
On June 24, the United States Supreme Court overturned the Roe v. Wade precedent that guaranteed the right to abortion at the federal level in that country. The whole world is in shock and women took to the streets to protest for their rights. The effect that the annulment of the precedent will have on access to health in the United States is undeniable, but what impact will it have on the information that circulates on social media? In the United States, a country where the biggest platforms are based, the discussion not only revolves around the prohibition of abortion, but there are currently controversial bills that subjugate the right to health, such as those that seek to ban the sale of certain contraceptives.(1)
Below is a review of the current policies of Meta, Google, YouTube, and Twitter that refer to content related to abortion, including education about its practices and the promotion of drugs that can be used to abort, as well as sexual and reproductive education policies.
In this analysis, we point out that the policies on the expressions that circulate organically on the platforms differ from those on advertisements or promoted content. These platforms prohibit advertisements about illegal products or activities in a generic way. On some platforms, abortion would fall into this category. In others, like Google, there is a section specifically devoted to ads on this topic. Google has some restrictions and/or prohibitions that depend on specific authorizations of the platform to allow its publication and, in addition, there are local regulations according to the country. This last point is relevant: every platform states that they expressly comply with the local regulations of the countries where they operate. Consequently, in those countries where abortion is illegal, the platforms expressly prohibit ads related to this topic. Furthermore, in the United States, the legislatures of each state will decide whether to keep abortion legal or prohibit it, which means that the implementation of the platforms' rules differs not only according to the country but also according to the regulations of each local jurisdiction.
For reference, this chart shows the projection of states that will ban abortion in the near future (those in red) and states where banning is likely to happen (in orange).
Let us see below what happens on each platform:
Meta
Community Guidelines
Meta allows information and content related to abortion, including posts and pages from NGOs such as HowToUse (2), which teach how to perform one safely. Now, in its restricted goods and services policy, Meta prohibits the publication of content “whose purpose is to buy, sell or exchange drugs.” The policy does not detail a list of the drugs banned, but it seems that it would cover, for example, the purchase and sale of drugs used for abortion.
Its policy on sexual services,although not directly related to the practice of abortion, allows “promoting sex education, discussing sexual experiences or practices, or offering classes or programs that teach techniques or provide talks related to sex.”. Within sexual education, we could interpret that content that teaches about contraceptive methods and/or abortion practices is allowed.
Advertising Policies for Facebook and Instagram
It is unclear whether they currently openly permit abortion-related ads in jurisdictions where it is allowed (either ads for abortion facilities, abortion medication, or how to safely perform an abortion), although it indicates that the ads “must not violate our community standards,” and that “Instagram ads must comply with the Instagram Community Guidelines.”
Notwithstanding this, the policy on prohibited content indicates that “Ads must not constitute, facilitate or promoteillegal products, services or activities.Ads targeted to minors must not promote products, services, or content that are inappropriate, illegal, or unsafe (…).” Regarding advertisements about unsafe substances, the policy says that “Ads must not promote the sale or use of illicit or recreational drugs, or other unsafe substances, products, or supplements as determined by Meta in its sole discretion.” In addition, the prohibited ad content includes products or services for adults, which we could interpret it includes sexual and reproductive education content. The policy states that “ads must not promote the sale or use of adult products or services,” and that "Ads promoting sexual and reproductive health products or services, like contraception and family planning must be targeted to people18 years or older and must not focus on sexual pleasure.” Furthermore, the promotion of over-the-counter medicines is allowed, but on the condition that these “must comply with all applicable local laws, required or established industry codes, guidelines, licenses and approvals, and include age and country targeting criteria consistent with applicable local laws,” while the promotion of prescription drugs requires prior written permission.
In any of these cases, it could be interpreted that, if abortion becomes illegal, those advertisements about places where people can have an abortion and/or about how to have an abortion safely could fall within these prohibitions.
Decisions of the Oversight Board
Although there is no decision explicitly about content, speech, or ads related to the issue of abortion, in its decision2021-015-FB-UA the Oversight Board found that Facebook's policy on regulated goods and services “does not prohibit content asking for drug advice in the context of a disease” and concluded that “(…) the definition of substances in Facebook Community Standards on restricted goods and services was not sufficiently understandable and transparent for users.”
This decision could imply that the company will clarify and specify, in the future, its policies regarding abortion and the sale of contraceptives. In this regard, we should mention that in its first annual report, recently published, the Board stated that Meta promised to implement most of the recommendations issued in 2021 and that the next task would be to ensure that the company “turns its promises into actions that improve the experience of people who use Facebook and Instagram." (3)
Search Engine Policies
First, Google highlights its policy to maximize access to information through its server and mentions that “occasionally results may contain content that some find objectionable or offensive (…) Such problematic content does not reflect Google’s own opinions. However, our belief in open access to information means that we do not remove such content except in accordance with the specific policies or legal obligations.”
The search engine's policy is based on removing content from search results for legal reasons. It states:"For example, we remove content if we receive valid notification under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). We also remove content from local versions of Google, consistent with local law, when we're notified that content is an issue. For example, we remove content that illegally glorifies the Nazi party from our German service, or that unlawfully insults religion from our Indian service.”
Taking this into consideration, Google shows search results on content related to abortions, how to perform them, where, etc.(4)
Policies on Search Features
Google also deploys different types of tools that facilitate the organization of search results, for example, through its "knowledge panels." They apply different policies to these tools than those applied to ordinary search results.
Among the policies for these Features is the medicinal content, which indicates "We don't allow content that contradicts or runs contrary to scientific or medical consensus and evidence-based best practices;” and that of regulated goods, which mentions “We don’t allow content that primarily facilitates the promotion or sale of regulated goods and services such as alcohol, gambling, pharmaceuticals, unapproved supplements, tobacco, fireworks, weapons, or health and medical devices.”
Concerning sexually explicit content, “Medical or scientific terms related to human anatomy or sex education are permitted.”
Ad Policies
This is where things get interesting. In its ad policy, Google includes a section where it mentions that ads about abortion are prohibited in certain countries and includes an exhaustive list of countries that criminalize abortion (at the time this post was written, Argentina, for example, despite having decriminalized abortion(5), is included in that list of countries).
The policy clarifies that ads related to abortion will only be shown in permitted areas and that, depending on the country, it may be subject to specific additional restrictions. These ads will also not appear on the "Google Display Network". In some countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, and Ireland, those who want to advertise using keywords related to how to get an abortion, must first obtain a specific certification as an abortion advertiser (see more about this certification here.) Depending on the type of advertiser, Google generates automatic in-ad disclosures as an advertiser that either provides abortions or does not provide abortions (for example, an organization that distributes pregnancy tests, performs ultrasounds, or assists pregnant people but does not perform abortions).
Google also includes a policy on ads related to contraceptive methods and/or fertility treatments. They are prohibited in Bahrain, China, Djibouti, Egypt, Hong Kong, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Malaysia, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Palestinian Territories, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen.
Finally, the section related to the policy on advertisements related to legal requirements states that “We expect all advertisers to comply with the local laws for any area their ads target, in addition to the standard Google Ads policies. We generally err on the side of caution in applying this policy because we don’t want to allow content of questionable legality.” The policy also includes a drop-down list to select a country to learn about applicable local regulations that restrict certain types of content in ads.
For example:
Or, in the case of Australia:
YouTube
Community Guidelines
The platform – which belongs to the same company as Google – does not allow content that seeks to promote the sale of regulated goods or services. The policy has a list of goods which includes "Pharmaceuticals without a prescription” and “Unlicensed medical services.” It also explains that the policy reaches not only the videos but also their descriptions, comments, and any other product within the platform.
Rules and Policies
Like the rest of the platforms we have seen, YouTube has a removal policy based on illegal content according to local regulations (“we also have a process in place to comply with local law.”)
Rules and Policies
Twitter also prohibits any illegal activities within its platform, including “selling, buying, or facilitating transactions in illegal goods or services, as well as certain types of regulated goods or services” such as, among others, “…drugs and controlled substances.”
Ad Policies
Twitter's ad policy also restricts the promotion of health and pharmaceutical products and services, depending on the product type and the country where the advertising campaign will take place. The site offers a list of countries with specific restrictions for each case. As a general principle, the promotion of these products and services will be prohibited unless it is expressly permitted with the conditions according to the country or has specific prior authorizations from Twitter.The products and services referred to in the policy include clinics where abortions are performed and the promotion or defense of abortion.
The policy clarifies, however, that the ban does not apply "in general" to clinics for sexually transmitted diseases, and non-prescription contraceptives (such as condoms and others) available in each country. Of course, the promotion of contraceptives without a prescription is prohibited in certain countries (you can see the complete list here.)
CONCLUSION
Given this serious setback in the protection of sexual and reproductive rights, we will pay attention to the reaction of the platforms: if they implement new policies or adjust others, what impact this decision will have on their moderation activities and, of course, how it will impact users' access to information. Some platforms have already started to restrict posts linked to the supply of medications for the voluntary interruption of pregnancy in different US states.
These posts were the immediate response by a sector of society to the US Supreme Court ruling to help those who would see their rights restricted after the decision. For example, a user uploaded an Instagram post offering people who want to order abortion pills, but want them sent to the poster's address instead to send them a direct message (“DM me if you want to order abortion pills, but want them sent to my address instead of yours”); while another user on Facebook published (“If you send me your address, I will mail you abortion pills.”) Both publications were blocked by Meta with the justification that they violated the standards on weapons, animals, and other regulated goods. We should also mention Meta's decision to label a pro-abortion group as a terrorist organization the day after the decision that reversed the Roe v. Wade precedent.
Here we see how a judicial decision, which vindicates legislative initiatives tending to criminalize not only abortion but any measure that can be understood as favorable to abortion, had an impact on the information circulating on social media regarding the issue. In order to avoid civil and even criminal liability for the content that they allow in their services, companies quickly began to restrict the advertising and supply of medications and procedures for the voluntary interruption of pregnancy. The worst fear, however, is that the restrictive measures reach activism, in addition to sexual and reproductive information and education.
In this context, the discussion about the immunity granted by Section 230 over the content generated by third parties is back in the spotlight. Some sectors of civil society have expressed that this rule will be the last bastion to allow reproductive health information to be kept online and that it will even protect platforms against criminal liability for state laws that criminalize abortion.
It remains to be seen if this restriction will be at a general level or if the platforms will start implementing it at the state level. The project letterchica.digital, which closely follows any platforms' modification to their internal policies, will be an invaluable tool to control eventual changes.
(1) See M. Ollove, “Some States Already Are Targeting Birth Control,” PEW, 19/5/22, retrieved from: https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline /2022/05/19/some-states-already-are-targeting-birth-control
(2) See How To Use Abortion Pill Facebook page at: https://www.facebook.com/HTUabortionpillES/?brand_redir=477385565779582. More information available at: https://www.howtouseabortionpill.org/es/aboutus/
(3) In its annual report, the Oversight Board pointed out that of the 86 recommendations made in 2021, Meta demonstrated the implementation or some type of progress on two thirds of the total. See Oversight Board, “Oversight Board publishes first Annual Report,” June 2022, retrieved from: https://oversightboard.com/news/322324590080612-oversight-board-publishes-first-annual-report/
(4) To confirm this, we ran a Google search for “how to get an abortion?”
(5) In December 2020, Law 27.610 on Access to the voluntary interruption of pregnancy was approved.
