abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb
Article

4 Sep 2024

Author:
Dan Milmo, The Guardian

Meta’s Oversight Board asks company not to automatically remove pro-Palestine phrase in posts

"Meta’s moderation board backs decision to allow ‘from the river to the sea’ in posts", 4 September 2024

Meta’s content moderation board has backed the company’s decision to allow Facebook posts containing the phrase “From the River to the Sea” after ruling that a blanket ban on the pro-Palestine slogan would hinder free speech.

The Oversight Board reviewed three cases involving Facebook posts that featured “From the River to the Sea” and found they did not break Meta’s rules involving restrictions on hate speech and incitement, while an outright ban on the phrase would interfere with political speech in “unacceptable ways”.

In a decision backed by a majority of its members, the board said the content showed solidarity with Palestinians but did not call for violence or exclusion and upheld Meta’s original decision to keep the content on Facebook.

The board, whose decisions on content are binding, said the phrase has multiple meanings and is used “in various ways and with different intentions”. While it could be seen as encouraging antisemitism and the elimination of Israel, the board said, it is also used as a call for solidarity with Palestinians

“The standalone phrase cannot be understood as a call to violence against a group based on their protected characteristics, as advocating for the exclusion of a particular group, or of supporting a designated entity – Hamas,” said the ruling.

A majority of the board said use of the phrase by Hamas – which is barred from Meta platforms and is designated a terrorist group by the UK and the US – does not make the phrase inherently violent or hateful.

...

The ruling added: “Because the phrase does not have a single meaning, a blanket ban on content that includes the phrase, a default rule towards removal of such content, or even using it as a signal to trigger enforcement or review, would hinder protected political speech in unacceptable ways.”

...
A spokesperson for Meta, which also owns Instagram and Threads, said: “We welcome the board’s review of our guidance on this matter. While all of our policies are developed with safety in mind, we know they come with global challenges and we regularly seek input from experts outside Meta, including the Oversight Board.”