FTC petition on deception and unfairness
This is a quick update.
I've filed a petition with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) requesting the issuance of an Interpretive Rule under Section 5 of the FTC Act regarding deceptive and unfair moderation practices on digital communications platforms.
The petition argues that consumers may be harmed when platforms permanently suspend accounts through automated "false positive" detections without providing specific, factually accurate reasons for the enforcement action or meaningful human review. It further argues that representing an appeal process as a genuine avenue for review, when appeals are allegedly resolved through automated systems that do not evaluate the underlying evidence, may constitute a deceptive act or practice.
The proposal examines these issues under both the FTC's Deception Policy Statement and Unfairness Policy Statement, arguing that such practices can result in substantial consumer injury, are not reasonably avoidable by affected users, and provide no countervailing benefit to consumers or competition. It also discusses transparency, material omissions, automated decision-making, the loss of access to paid digital services, and the preservation of consumer confidence in digital marketplaces.
The petition concludes by requesting that the FTC clarify, through an Interpretive Rule, that terminating access to paid or essential digital services based solely on automated detection without specific justification or meaningful human review, and misrepresenting the nature of an appeals process, constitute deceptive and unfair practices under Section 5 of the FTC Act.