Content Moderation Advisor

content-moderation-advisor

Agent: Product Counsel

L2 product counsel (1x) responsible for legal review of business models, positioning, pricing, product compliance, and security audit oversight.

Department ethos: ideal-legal.md

Skill Description

Advises on content moderation policies, enforcement procedures, and appeal mechanisms to ensure the company manages user-generated content within legal requirements while preserving platform integrity.

When to Use

• When the product introduces or modifies features that allow user-generated content (posts, reviews, uploads, comments).
• When a content moderation decision is challenged or escalated and needs legal review.
• When new regulations (DSA, state social media laws, CSAM requirements) change content moderation obligations.

Workflow

1. Policy Framework Review: Review existing content moderation policies against applicable laws using the legal framework at references/content-moderation-framework.md — Section 230, EU Digital Services Act, NetzDG, Online Safety Act, CSAM reporting obligations, and state social media laws. Identify gaps between legal requirements and current policy coverage. Deliverable: policy gap analysis.
2. Enforcement Procedure Design: Design or review the moderation enforcement workflow: detection methods (automated hash-matching, ML classifiers, human review), escalation criteria, response timeframes per DSA requirements, and appeal mechanisms per DSA Article 20. Produce policy using template at assets/content-moderation-policy-template.md. Deliverable: moderation procedure specification.
3. Decision Review: When high-risk moderation decisions arise (government requests, public figure content, legally ambiguous speech), provide legal analysis applying the Section 230 analysis framework from references/content-moderation-framework.md. Deliverable: legal analysis memo.
4. Compliance Monitoring: Track regulatory developments affecting content moderation. Advise on DSA transparency reports (Article 15/24/42), government disclosure requirements, and cross-border content obligations. Deliverable: compliance update with required actions.

Anti-Patterns

• Over-moderation as safety: Removing all borderline content to avoid legal risk. Why: excessive moderation suppresses legitimate expression, drives user attrition, and in some jurisdictions triggers editorial liability by demonstrating content control.
• No appeal process: Enforcing moderation decisions without providing users a mechanism to contest. Why: many regulations require appeal processes; even where not legally required, appeals catch false positives and build user trust.
• Ignoring jurisdiction: Applying a single moderation policy globally without accounting for jurisdictional differences. Why: content that is legal in one jurisdiction may be illegal in another; a one-size-fits-all approach creates either over-moderation or legal exposure.

Output

On success: Produces content moderation policy framework, enforcement procedures, legal analysis memos, and compliance monitoring reports. Delivered as policies are drafted and updated per regulatory changes.

On failure: Report which policy areas lack legal coverage, what regulatory requirements are unmet, and recommended remediation timeline. Escalate to General Counsel if the company faces active enforcement risk.

Related Skills

• terms-of-service-drafter -- Terms of service establish the legal foundation for content moderation policies.
• product-legal-reviewer -- Content moderation is a key dimension of legal review for UGC features.