BSR | Human Rights Impact Assessment: Facebook in Myanmar 29 length of time, going back to 2012, that civil society organizations have been raising concerns with Facebook, and not to become too defensive about the efforts that Facebook has made during this time. It is also important to note that the local stakeholder community is continuing to grow and evolve—especially as it relates to increasing capacity to engage on issues of technology and human rights—and this presents an opportunity for more productive collaboration over time. » Facebook can focus engagement on vulnerable populations. Several stakeholders emphasized the importance of Facebook making sure that its engagement locally is not restricted to the government and major civil society organizations, but also has a focus on vulnerable populations. One suggested that “Facebook should meet people outside Yangon and Mandalay to see how Facebook is used and misused in villages by low-income and rural populations.” Another emphasized “groups most at risk of hate speech, such as women, the Muslim population, and ethnic groups” and “groups most likely to believe fake news, such as those in villages and rural areas.” » There are tough transparency dilemmas. The advantages and disadvantages of increased transparency need to be thoroughly considered. Facebook has steadily increased transparency on freedom of expression, privacy, and Community Standards enforcement over time, but additional disclosures also present risks. For example, the disclosure of detailed local Community Standards enforcement guidelines may increase digital literacy and help identify gaps, but it may also provide bad actors with a road map on how to game the system. Similarly, insights from the use of AI may assist civil society organizations and other partners in efforts to address hate speech and misinformation, but if too much detail is shared, privacy rights can be placed at risk. » There is a shared determination to address human rights challenges. During this HRIA, BSR witnessed a strong determination on the part of both Facebook and stakeholders to address human rights in Myanmar as a matter of utmost importance and urgency. While many stakeholders (and Facebook itself) emphasized that previous Facebook efforts have fallen short, the BSR team also experienced first-hand a shared sense of urgency to establish a robust human rights approach at Facebook. We believe there is significant potential for collaborative efforts that enhance the realization of human rights, both now and over the long-term. 5.4 SYSTEM-LEVEL CHANGE It is widely recognized that Facebook’s human rights impacts in Myanmar cannot be addressed by Facebook alone, but instead require broader systemwide change. » Enforcing Community Standards is a necessary but not a sufficient activity. The root causes of hate speech, incitement to violence, and misinformation need to be addressed as well. While the sense of urgency around Community Standards enforcement during this assessment was unmistakable, there is also interest in how Facebook—alone and in partnership with others—can help create a local environment more conducive to the company’s mission of building community and bringing the world closer together. One interviewee feared that “A strategy based solely on taking content down will cause a backlash, whereas Facebook’s massive profile in Myanmar is an opportunity