Meta oversight board rules pro-Palestinian phrase not hate speech violation
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Meta logo displayed on a laptop screen and Meta account on Facebook displayed on a phone screen are seen in this illustration photo taken in Krakow, Poland, on Aug. 27. Photo: Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images
Meta's oversight board ruled on Wednesday that posts with the pro-Palestinian phrase "from the river to the sea" don't violate the social media company's rules on hate speech.
Why it matters: Meta has faced criticism from users who have said its platforms stifled pro-Palestinian speech and enabled antisemitic speech.
- The board reviewed three pieces of content on Facebook and said they "contain contextual signs of solidarity with Palestinians — but no language calling for violence or exclusion."
- "They also do not glorify or even refer to Hamas, an organization designated as dangerous by Meta," the decision said.
Context: Pro-Palestinian activists use the phrase, which is followed by "Palestine will be free," as a call for peace and equality.
- It refers to the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
- Some pro-Israel activists consider the phrase antisemitic for its inclusion of the state of Israel.
State of play: Campus protesters in the spring faced backlash from university administrators for using the same phrase.
- Lawmakers condemned the term during the testimony of elite university leaders. Then-Columbia president Minouche Shafik said using the term could warrant discipline.
Zoom in: If the phrase is accompanied with language deemed hateful, it may warrant removal, per the board.
- "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," the board said in the decision.
What they're saying: Digital rights activists and pro-Palestinian groups have said Meta stifled critiques of the Israeli government and its military incursion in Gaza, which has killed more than 40,000 Palestinians, the Washington Post reported.
- Some Jewish groups said Meta has allowed antisemitism to surge on its social media platform following the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel that killed 1,600 Israelis.
The big picture: Meta created and funded the oversight board to be able to deflect responsibility for making tough decisions on free speech.
- To-date, most of the board's decisions have been met with little pushback, as they typically address very narrow but intellectually divisive use cases.
- This example is notable, given the global nature of Israel-Hamas protests and debate.
How it works: Case decisions from the board — made up of non-partisan academics, technologists and lawyers — are binding, meaning Meta is responsible for implementing them, but policy recommendations from the board are not.
- Religious speech is a particularly thorny subject for content moderators, and the board has overturned Meta's content decisions on several cases regarding religious speech, including a decision by Meta to block a post that compared a Russian army in Ukraine to Nazis.
Go deeper: Reignited protests on the syllabus for fall semester
