Six of Nine Advisers Resign From Big Tech’s Anti-Terrorism Consortium Over Oversight Rollback
Six of GIFCT’s nine independent advisers resigned in September 2026, saying a Meta-backed plan would block scrutiny of the consortium’s counterterrorism work. The proposal would let tech companies choose members and bar performance reviews.
Six of the nine independent experts on the advisory board of the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT) resigned in September 2026, citing a Meta-backed plan they say would strip the body of its ability to scrutinize the tech industry’s anti-terrorism efforts.
The departing members — university researchers and civil society representatives — sent a resignation letter stating they had “lost confidence in the GIFCT’s ability to deliver effectively on its founding mission.” The letter described the proposed changes as “decoration and accountability theatre,” arguing that a body barred from taking positions or evaluating performance is not an advisory body at all.
Tensions surfaced in July 2026 when Meta’s vice president of content policy, Nell McCarthy, emailed the committee saying the consortium no longer wanted the experts’ scrutiny on the effectiveness of Big Tech’s counterterrorism work. Under the proposed restructuring, new advisory committee members would be selected by tech companies rather than elected by current members, and the committee would be barred from weighing in on the consortium’s performance or making collective recommendations.
Meta currently chairs GIFCT’s operating board, giving it significant influence over policy. The consortium’s roughly 35 members include Microsoft and YouTube. A GIFCT spokesperson said the proposed changes were “informed by several rounds of feedback” and are not yet final, adding that the consortium is exploring how to better engage civil society and governments.
The resignations come at a difficult moment for online safety efforts. Extremist content, including AI-generated material from groups such as Islamic State, remains a persistent problem. Newer threats include AI-supported exploitation schemes used to coerce young people into carrying out violence.
One departing expert warned the change could have lasting consequences: “There won’t be critical voices raising concerns about what GIFCT is doing or is not doing. They are going to regret it in the longer term.”
A 2024 WIRED investigation had previously identified failures in GIFCT’s content-takedown database and strained relations between tech company leadership and the unpaid advisory committee.