SABAL vs ADL - Stopping Anti-First Amendment Bullies
Read it: https://www.norredlaw.com/documents/63-ORDER-MSJ-GrantingIP-DenyingIP.pdf
ADL Accusations:
That Sabal has engaged in discriminatory practices in violation of federal, state, and local laws by excluding protected classes from employment opportunities.
That Sabal has allowed or promoted hate speech on its platforms, which includes content that promotes hatred against certain minority groups based on race, religion, or ethnicity.
That Sabal has directly or indirectly supported extremist groups, providing them with financial or other forms of assistance.
That Sabal has been a source or conduit for misinformation, particularly content that could incite hatred or violence against certain groups.
That Sabal of failing to adequately moderate its user-generated content, leading to an environment where hate speech, harassment, and other harmful content proliferate.
Sabal's Rebuttal:
Sabal vehemently denies the allegations of discrimination, asserting that all hiring practices are based on merit and business needs without regard to race, religion, or any protected characteristics. Sabal provides evidence of their hiring practices, including documentation showing that employment decisions are made based on merit, skills, and business needs, not on protected characteristics. They present statistics and testimonies from diverse employees to support this claim.
Regarding hate speech, Sabal explains that they have implemented robust content moderation systems and community guidelines to prevent and remove such content, asserting that any instances cited by the ADL were promptly addressed once reported. Sabal outlines the implementation of robust content moderation systems, including:
-A detailed set of community guidelines which prohibit hate speech.
-Employment of a significant number of content moderators.
-Use of AI technology for detecting and removing harmful content.
-Evidence of quick response times to user reports and removal of flagged content.
Sabal refutes the claim of supporting extremist groups, stating there is no evidence or financial record of such support, and any association mentioned by the ADL is either misconstrued or without merit. Sabal refutes the claim by presenting financial records which show no direct financial support or contributions to the extremist groups mentioned by the ADL. They also clarify any perceived associations, stating these were either misinterpretations or lacked context.
On the accusation of spreading misinformation, Sabal argues that their platform encourages free speech but actively works to mitigate false information through fact-checking partnerships and user reporting systems. Sabal acknowledges the challenges of content moderation but insists that they have taken significant steps to improve their systems, including hiring more moderators and using AI tools, and that the ADL's portrayal exaggerates the extent of unmoderated harmful content.
-Sabal has established partnerships with fact-checking organizations to verify information shared on their platforms.
-They have implemented user-reporting mechanisms and algorithms designed to flag and reduce the spread of misinformation.
-Sabal provides examples of how they have handled specific instances of misinformation, showing proactive measures taken.
WWG1WGA
Post last edited at
