Meta Keeps Ignoring a Whole EU Body and Leaving Banned Users Screaming Into the Void With No Answers

Meta keeps getting asked the same question by an official EU dispute body. Why did you ban this person. The answer almost never comes back.

Appeals Centre Europe handles disputes from social media users who say they were wrongly kicked off platforms. In the year leading up to March 2026, it looked at 4,600 cases of Facebook, Instagram, and Threads users who said their accounts were unfairly suspended. Meta provided evidence in fewer than 100 of those cases. Fewer than 100 out of 4,600. That is not a response rate. That is a shrug dressed up as a policy.

You May Like

India’s Hottest New Political Movement Is Led by a Cockroach — And It Just Humiliated the BJP Online

Russia Unleashes 600 Drones and 90 Missiles on Ukraine — 4 Dead, Dozens Injured, and a Museum Destroyed

Her Husband Was Her Stalker All Along — And Tech Giants Let Him Hide Until He Killed Her

“I Will Kill Anyone Filming Me” — Tough Nigerian Cop Begs for Forgiveness After Viral Threat Backfires

If the Cockroach Party Wins, Does That Make Killing Cockroaches a Crime in India?

The EU says platforms should engage in good faith with the body. The body’s decisions are not legally binding. Meta seems to have read that part very carefully and decided it means they do not have to do anything at all. Users are left twisting in the wind. Businesses disappear overnight. Accounts with years of memories vanish without explanation. And the company that runs the platform cannot be bothered to send over the evidence.

Last year, more than 500 people contacted the BBC with complaints about their Instagram and Facebook accounts being banned with no appeal and no human to speak to. Some worried the police might show up. Others lost income streams tied to online businesses. Meta repeatedly refused to comment publicly. But when the BBC raised individual cases, bans were often overturned quickly. That tells you everything. The system works when someone with a microphone calls. For everyone else, it is a black hole.

The problem is not just about bans. The same body reviewed more than 1,400 cases of content flagged as hate speech. In more than two thirds of decisions, platforms failed to enforce their own rules and left hateful content up. Misogynistic posts. Racist posts comparing black footballers to monkeys. Homophobic and transphobic attacks. Antisemitic videos shared by prominent figures in Poland. An AI generated video about the Russia Ukraine war that spread misinformation on TikTok.

TikTok left up 83 percent of potential hate speech. Instagram 74 percent. Facebook 61 percent. YouTube 58 percent. The platforms all have policies. They just do not follow them.

Social media companies did not provide relevant content for review in 72 percent of more than 10,000 reports. When the body was able to review the content, it disagreed with the platform’s decision 59 percent of the time. More than half the time, the platform got it wrong. And the platforms are not even consistently sharing whether they implemented the body’s decisions or not.

YouTube said it is committed to engaging with dispute bodies. TikTok said it holds meetings and sends emails. Meta did not respond to requests for comment. Millions of users are shouting for help. The platforms are wearing headphones with the volume off.