Meta provides no transparent or accessible channels in Latin America for users, civil society organisations, or public authorities to file complaints, submit legal notifications, or challenge content moderation decisions beyond its internal in-platform appeals. The lack of formal contact mechanisms restricts the defence of rights, obstructs judicial and electoral oversight, and leaves moderation decisions by a foreign company largely beyond regional accountability.
This lack of formal channels also affects the region’s electoral bodies, which rely on official channels to communicate resolutions, request information, or enforce orders during electoral processes. Even one of the Facebook pages that should offer information on how to file complaints appears blocked with the message “This content is not relevant to your location.”
The email addresses Meta used to use—such as support@fb.com or appeals@fb.com—are no longer available or operational. The company channels all information about its policies and internal processes through sprawling, fragmented, and difficult-to-navigate help centers, without offering external alternatives for those needing formal assistance.
In the region, the only existing avenues are internal mechanisms within the platform itself, always under strict conditions: only the directly sanctioned user can appeal, and only within the circuit pre-established by Meta. There are no direct channels for affected third parties, legal representatives, or organizations. Nor are there channels for prosecutors or judges, as they lack an electronic address for receiving official communications, court notifications, or information requests, which limits a country’s ability to exercise jurisdiction over decisions made by a foreign company.
Meta barely maintains open direct contact channels (emails) for certain profiles: press@fb.com for journalists seeking to contact the press area and investor@meta.com for those interested in investing in the company.
In short, Meta operates in Latin America without offering formal channels (not even an official email address) to inquire about or challenge moderation decisions after the option to appeal through the platform’s internal mechanisms has been exhausted. The lack of available contact channels—such as email addresses, phone numbers, or even a postal address to send a formal notification—not only hinders the defense of rights but also limits the ability of the region’s judicial authorities to act on platform decisions that affect their citizens or to protect the integrity of elections.
RELATED LINKS:
Meta removes political ads from its archive and weakens the transparency of digital campaigns
Less moderation, more disinformation: the impact of Meta’s new policies on Ecuador’s elections