“medical condition.” The Board asked Meta about the discrepancy in the terms used in the public-facing policy and the internal guidance. Meta acknowledged the discrepancy and amended its public facing policy to use the same term used in its internal guidance. The Board finds the post has multiple plausible interpretations. The woman may be targeted as a human rights defender or as a target of abuse, or both. The different interpretations are analyzed further below. Regardless of the interpretation, the gender of the depicted person, and the gendered nature of the mocking, the policy is violated in this case so long as the depicted person is identifiable. II. Enforcement action The Board is concerned about potential challenges in the enforcement of this Community Standard. First, the content in this case, which included a photograph of a Syrian activist who had been physically attacked and was reported multiple times by a Facebook user, was not reviewed by a human moderator. This may indicate that this type of violation is not prioritized for review. Second, the Board is concerned that enforcement of the policy, especially when it requires analyzing an image together with a caption, is challenging for Arabic language content. As the Board has previously explained, Meta relies on a combination of human moderators and machine learning tools referred to as classifiers to enforce its Community Standards. (See Wampum belt, 2021-012-FB-UA). In this case, Meta informed the Board that the company has a classifier targeting Bullying and Harassment for ‘General Language Arabic’. The Board notes that the independent human rights due diligence report published by BSR, which Meta commissioned in response to the Board’s recommendation in an earlier case, noted problems in Meta’s enforcement in Arabic. It found the company’s problems in enforcement may be due to inadequate sensitivity to different dialects of Arabic. The Board is concerned, based on findings by the independent human rights due diligence report and the lack of enforcement in this case, that there may be challenges with both the proactive and reactive paths for effective enforcement of this policy in the region. The lack of transparency on auditing of the classifiers enforcing this policy is also concerning to the Board. 8.2 Compliance with Meta’s human rights responsibilities The Board finds that Meta’s initial decision to leave up the post was inconsistent with its