The global media reports on technology platforms facing complex dilemmas related to misinformation, inappropriate platform use, and users with extreme views. But social good platforms and philanthropy intermediaries also face these dilemmas: who should be on (should white supremacists be allowed to fundraise?), who should be off (how should we approach “deplatforming?”), who should be flagged (based on what criteria?), who gets to make these decisions?

At GlobalGiving, we are calling this problem the Neutrality Paradox. Despite the unique value of technology to provide open, democratic spaces online, digital platforms are powered by organizations that need to take responsibility for how their technology is used.

Charitable giving platforms were created on a system of transparency, efficiency, and trust. What happens when information is uncovered about a nonprofit’s potential affiliations with problematic governments? Or when a lawful nonprofit takes a strong stance that is disagreeable to others, as in the case of so-called ‘hate groups’? Or what if an organization’s funding is coming from a questionable source?

These questions begin to get to the essence of the Neutrality Paradox challenge. How do we best navigate these issues fairly and effectively? GlobalGiving is seeking to address the problem by gathering stakeholders with diverse viewpoints and expertise to develop and test prototype solutions to help platform providers and philanthropic intermediaries make challenging decisions.

Read the full article about the neutrality paradox of global giving by Rachel Smith at Global Giving.