Who Decides What’s Hate Speech? The Oversight Board’s Controversial Ruling on Free Expression

The majority of Meta’s Oversight Board concluded that the slogan “from the river to the sea” is not intrinsically hate speech and should not be immediately banned from Instagram and Facebook. The board determined that the statement has numerous meanings and is frequently used to express sympathy with Palestinians rather than to instigate violence. Critics, notably the Anti-Defamation League, say that the slogan is anti-Semitic and endangers the Jewish community. Despite this verdict, users may suffer legal implications in nations such as Germany, where the phrase can lead to punishment. The decision allows the slogan’s use on Meta’s platforms unless it explicitly violates hate speech policies.

Editor’s Note: The Meta Oversight Board’s ruling on the tagline “from the river to the sea” exemplifies the complexities of controlling social media material. This decision highlights the difficulties of defining hate speech in a way that respects both free expression and the sensitivities of many populations. However, it raises an important question: who gave Meta the ability to determine what constituted hate speech? In taking on this position, Meta is not only censoring content but also setting the global bounds of permissible debate. This power should be scrutinized, as it places a private company in a position to influence conversations on deeply political and contentious issues. [See also: Musk and Durov Targeted in Growing Censorship Trend, Silencing Dissent: How Censorship Undermine Scientific Progress, Robert Reich Advocates Censorship and Calls for Musk’s Arrest, Challenging Free Speech Protections, Challenging Big Tech Censorship: A Lawsuit’s Fight to Reclaim Online Freedom of Speech, The Democratic Erosion Through Censorship]

Read Original Article