Six of the nine independent members of the advisory board for the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT) resigned on Monday, marking a significant rupture within the tech industry consortium. The departure follows a dispute with the group’s leadership, dominated by Meta, over proposed changes that would effectively neuter the committee’s ability to scrutinize the organization’s operations.
According to a letter reviewed by WIRED and interviews with departing members, the conflict traces back to a July email from Nell McCarthy, Meta’s vice president overseeing content policy. While acknowledging the experts’ contributions to identifying violent trends, McCarthy stated that the consortium no longer desired their oversight regarding the effectiveness of Big Tech’s counter-terrorism efforts. She outlined a plan to “refresh” the six-year-old advisory committee, shifting the power to select new members from current board members to the tech companies themselves.
Under the proposed structure, the advisory body would be prohibited from evaluating the consortium’s performance or issuing collective recommendations. The departing experts argued that this transformation would reduce their role to mere decoration. “We all know that a body that cannot scrutinise, take a position, or evaluate is not an advisory body at all,” the resignation letter read. “It is decoration and accountability theatre.”
A GIFCT spokesperson stated that the proposed changes were informed by multiple rounds of feedback and are not yet final. The consortium described the adjustments as part of an effort to better engage civil society and governments, citing multi-stakeholderism as a core principle. Meta deferred comment to the GIFCT.
The resignation comes amid a challenging political and technological landscape. A 2024 WIRED investigation highlighted internal turmoil at GIFCT, including delays in TikTok’s membership bid and failures in the tip-sharing database used to coordinate content takedowns. Furthermore, the rise of generative AI has complicated content moderation, with extremist groups utilizing AI tools for propaganda and newer nihilistic collectives employing AI-supported scams to recruit victims.
Two of the experts spoke on condition of anonymity, citing fears of retaliation from the Trump administration and Republican lawmakers in Congress. Both the GIFCT and one adviser’s organization were mentioned in a February House Judiciary Committee report investigating alleged online censorship. Advisers recalled a meeting where they questioned consortium leaders about operating in this fraught environment but received unclear answers and pushback for raising concerns deemed outside their purview.
While three other experts did not join the resignations, the entire 17-member panel sent a letter to McCarthy last Friday disagreeing with the plan to curtail the group’s independence. When the advisory committee was established in 2020, then-executive director Nick Rasmussen encouraged members to act as the organization’s conscience and “call bullshit” when necessary.
Critics of the proposal argue that the GIFCT model may have exhausted its potential. One departing expert predicted that any new members appointed under the revised system would reach the same conclusions as those who quit, describing the situation as a “merry-go-round.” Another called the rollback of independence a “shame,” warning that the loss of critical voices would ultimately harm the consortium’s ability to prevent terrorists from exploiting online platforms.
Leave a Reply