Previous 1 / 11 Next

4/10/22, 10:47 Oversight Board | Independent Judgment. Transparency. Legitimacy. OVERTURNED 2022-001-FB-UA Knin cartoon The Oversight Board has overturned Meta’s original decision to leave a post on Facebook which depicted ethnic Serbs as rats Policies and topics Discrimination, Race and ethnicity, Freedom of expression Hate speech Region and countries Europe Croatia Platform Facebook Attachments Serbian translation Croatian translation Knin cartoon public comments This decision is also available in Serbian and Croatian. Да бисте прочитали ову одлуку на српском језику, кликните овде. Da biste ovu odluku pročitali na hrvatskom, kliknite ovdje. Case summary The Oversight Board has overturned Meta’s original decision to leave a post on Facebook which depicted ethnic Serbs as rats. While Meta eventually removed the post for violating its Hate Speech policy, about 40 moderators had previously decided that the content did not violate this policy. This suggests that moderators consistently interpreted the Hate Speech policy as requiring them to identify an explicit, rather than implicit, comparison between ethnic Serbs and rats before finding a violation. https://www.oversightboard.com/decision/FB-JRQ1XP2M 1/11

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Oversight Board Case of Knin Cartoon

Case Law

Country

Croatia

Country Location

Latitude: 45.67468969608892

Longitude: 17.0568924713861

Country Location (linked Case Law): Croatia

Decision Date: Jun 17, 2022

Case Status: Closed

Case Outcome (Disposition)

Overturned Meta’s initial decision

Keywords

Hate Speech
Oversight Bodies

Judicial Body: Meta's Oversight Board

Court Name: Oversight Board

Case Number: 2022-001-FB-UA

Case Summary: On June 17, 2022, the Oversight Board overturned Meta’s original decision to uphold a Facebook post in which ethnic Serbs were depicted as rats. Although Meta eventually removed the content, it initially considered the post did not infringe the company’s Hate Speech Community Standard. It later decided it infringed the “spirit” but not the letter of the Standard, since the policy did not prohibit attacks against groups under a protected characteristic identified implicitly. It then decided it did infringe the letter of the policy. In its decision, the Board found that post breached the Hate Speech Community Standard and the Violence and Incitement Community Standard. It found it was dehumanizing, hateful, and may contribute to a climate in which people could feel justified in attacking ethnic Serbs. In the Board’s view, removing the content from the platform was necessary to address the severe harms posed by hate speech based on ethnicity, and aligned with Meta’s human rights responsibilities.

*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. These decisions are binding, unless implementing them could violate the law. The Board can also choose to issue recommendations on the company’s content policies.

Case Significance: The Oversight Board decision contracted expression by agreeing with Meta’s decision to remove the content. However, it did so under an international human rights law recognized exception since the content in question was dehumanizing and hateful given that it compared ethnic Serbs to rats and celebrated past acts of discriminatory treatment. In the Board’s view, removing the content from the platform was necessary to address the severe hate speech based on ethnicity.

The decision establishes a binding or persuasive precedent within its jurisdiction.

According to Article 2 of the Oversight Board Charter, “For each decision, any prior board decisions will have precedential value and should be viewed as highly persuasive when the facts, applicable policies, or other factors are substantially similar.” In addition, Article 4 of the Oversight Board Charter establishes, “The board’s resolution of each case will be binding and Facebook (now Meta) will implement it promptly, unless implementation of a resolution could violate the law. In instances where Facebook identifies that identical content with parallel context – which the board has already decided upon – remains on Facebook (now Meta), it will take action by analyzing whether it is technically and operationally feasible to apply the board’s decision to that content as well. When a decision includes policy guidance or a policy advisory opinion, Facebook (now Meta) will take further action by analyzing the operational procedures required to implement the guidance, considering it in the formal policy development process of Facebook (now Meta), and transparently communicating about actions taken as a result.”

Related Caselaw (self)

Source URL: Columbia Global Freedom of Expression

Collection

Columbia

Date Updated: Nov 14, 2024

Primary Documents

Decision (in English).pdf
English
Download View