On April 11 the Legal Defense Fund announced it was exiting Meta’s external civil rights advisory board over concerns that the changes the technology company made to its diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility policies in January.
According to The Guardian, those changes, which some saw as Meta’s capitulation to the incoming Trump administration, contributed to their decision to exit the technology company’s advisory board.
In January, the LDF, along with several other civil rights organizations that were part of the board, sent a letter to Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s CEO, outlining their concerns regarding how the changes would negatively impact users.
“We are shocked and disappointed that Meta did not consult with this group or its members in considering these significant revisions to its content policy. Meta’s failure to engage even its own advisory group of external civil rights experts shows a cynical disregard for its diverse user base and calls into question Meta’s commitment to the free speech principles to which it claims to want to ‘return.’”
They closed the letter, hoping that Meta would recommit to the ideals of free speech, “If Meta truly wants to recommit to free speech, it must commit to free speech for everyone on its services. As Meta’s external civil rights advisory group, we offer our advice and expertise in crafting a better path forward.”
Those concerns only grew over subsequent months, culminating in another letter, this one from LDF Associate Director-Counsel Todd A. Cox, which indicated that the organization was withdrawing its membership from Meta’s civil rights advisory board.
“I am deeply disturbed and disappointed by Meta’s announcement on January 7, 2025, of irresponsible changes to the content moderation policies on its platforms that pose grave risks to the health and safety of Black communities and risk further destabilizing our republic,” Cox wrote.
He continued, “For nearly a decade, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF) has invested a great deal of time and resources working with Meta as part of an informal committee advising the company on civil rights issues. Yet Meta made these content moderation policy changes without consulting or warning this group, and many of the changes directly conflict with guidance from LDF and partners. As a result, LDF can no longer in good conscience participate as part of Meta’s civil rights advisory committee.”
In a separate, but related letter, the LDF pointedly reminded Meta of the actual obligations of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other laws governing discrimination in the workplace, in contrast to the false claims of the Trump administration that diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives discriminate against white Americans.
“While Meta has altered its policies, its obligations under federal civil rights laws are unchanged. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other civil rights laws prohibit discrimination in the workplace, including disparate treatment, workplace policies that have an unfair disproportionate effect, and hostile work environment. Nor have the Trump administration’s false attacks on diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility programs changed the legality of these efforts. If Meta fails its antidiscrimination obligations due to the absence of diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility programs, it exposes itself to further legal liability,” Cox wrote in that letter.
In the LDF’s press release announcing both letters, Cox called attention to Meta’s contribution to the increasing violence and division in the country’s social climate.
“LDF worked hard and in good faith with Meta’s leadership and its civil rights advisory group to help ensure the company’s workforce reflected the values and racial makeup of the United States and to advance policies that prioritized safety for the many diverse communities who use Meta’s platforms,” Cox said. “Now, we cannot in good conscience support a company that is knowingly taking steps to implement policy changes that will sow further division and violence across the United States. We urge Meta to reverse course on these dangerous changes.”
RELATED CONTENT: Meta’s Chief Diversity Officer Addresses Company’s Plan To Cutback On DEI Programs
