Facebook Community Standards, Objectionable Content, Hate Speech/Hateful Conduct
Oversight Board Case of South Africa Slurs
South Africa
Closed Mixed Outcome
Global Freedom of Expression is an academic initiative and therefore, we encourage you to share and republish excerpts of our content so long as they are not used for commercial purposes and you respect the following policy:
Attribution, copyright, and license information for media used by Global Freedom of Expression is available on our Credits page.
On 18 December 2023, the Oversight Board issued a summary decision overturning Meta’s original decision to leave up content on Facebook that advocated for violence against gay people during Pride month. The Board found the content was a clear example of an enforcement error under Meta’s Hate Speech policy. Meta reversed its decision and removed the post after the case was brought to its attention by the Board. In its decision, the Board held that the content violated the company’s Hate Speech policy, as it advocated for violence against a protected group.
*The Oversight Board is a separate entity from Meta and will provide its independent judgment on both individual cases and questions of policy. Both the Board and its administration are funded by an independent trust. The Board has the authority to decide whether Facebook and Instagram should allow or remove content. The Board issues full decisions and summary decisions. Decisions, except summary decisions, are binding unless implementing them could violate the law. The Board can also choose to issue recommendations on the company’s content policies. Summary decisions are a transparency mechanism, providing information to the public on Meta’s decision making and the Board’s recommendations relating to cases where Meta reversed its original decision on its own accord, after receiving notice from the Board about the appeal.
In July 2023, a scripted 30-second video showing a gay couple being attacked was posted on Facebook. The video depicted a group dressed in religious attire joining the assault. It ended with the on-screen text “Do your part this pride month” in English. The post’s caption read, “Together we can change the world.” The content gathered 200,000 views and received fewer than 50 reports.
Under Meta’s Hate Speech policy, content supporting or encouraging harm against people based on protected characteristics—including sexual orientation—is prohibited. Meta originally did not remove the post. However, after the Oversight Board brought this case to the company’s attention, Meta removed the post for violating its Hate Speech policy.
On 18 December 2023, the Oversight Board issued a summary decision on the matter. The central issue was whether leaving up a video calling for violence against gay people was compatible with Meta’s content policies and obligations under international human rights law.
The Board noted that this case highlighted enforcement errors in applying Meta’s Hate Speech policy. It opined that the content had multiple indicators of inciting violence against a protected group, from the depiction of the attack to the text urging people to “do their part” during Pride month. The Board expressed concern about the negative impact such enforcement errors have on protected groups. It further emphasized that because the content was reported during a celebratory month for the LGBTQIA+ community, content moderation should have been more vigilant.
The Board reiterated its recommendation from the Knin Cartoon case, urging Meta to modify its Hate Speech policy and reviewer guidance to clarify that implicit references are prohibited to improve policy enforcement. Meta has partially implemented this recommendation, yet the Board urged the company to reduce its error rate in hate speech moderation.
The Board overturned Meta’s original decision to leave up the content and acknowledged Meta’s correction of the error. Furthermore, it encouraged Meta to fully implement still-open recommendations.
Decision Direction indicates whether the decision expands or contracts expression based on an analysis of the case.
This decision yields a mixed outcome on expression. While overturning Meta’s original decision not to remove the post contracts expression, the Oversight Board did so to prohibit hate speech that advocates for violence. This action aligns with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which permits the restriction of speech that advocates for discrimination, hostility, or violence.
Global Perspective demonstrates how the court’s decision was influenced by standards from one or many regions.
Case significance refers to how influential the case is and how its significance changes over time.
Let us know if you notice errors or if the case analysis needs revision.