Meta should amend its Hate Speech Community Standard, adding the section marked as “new” below. The amended Hate Speech Community Standard would then include the following or other substantially similar language to that effect:
“Do not post
Tier 1
Content targeting a person or group of people (including all groups except those who are considered non-protected groups described as having carried out violent crimes or sexual offenses or representing less than half of a group) on the basis of their aforementioned protected characteristic(s) or immigration status in written or visual form with dehumanizing speech in the form of comparisons to or generalizations about criminals:
Sexual Predators
Violent Criminals
Other Criminals
[NEW] Except when the actors (e.g., police, military, army, soldiers, government, state officials) and/or crimes (e.g., atrocity crimes or grave human rights violations, such as those specified in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court) imply a reference to state rather than targeting people based on nationality.”
The Board will consider this recommendation implemented when Meta updates the public-facing Hate Speech Community Standard and shares the updated specific guidance with its reviewers.
Our commitment: We will explore policy options to allow dehumanizing speech (e.g., comparisons to criminals) in content where the crime or the actors signal it is a reference to a state rather than people. We will provide updates on the status of this policy development in future reports to the Board.
Considerations: Our Hate Speech policy aims to prevent speech that may contribute to an environment of intimidation and exclusion, or that in some cases may promote offline violence. This policy protects against speech so that individuals don’t feel attacked on the basis of who they are, which is why we remove attacks on people based on their protected characteristics such as ethnicity and national origin. This includes removing allegations that someone, in relation to their protected characteristics, is a sexual predator, violent criminal, or other criminal. As noted in this case from the Oversight Board, this would include removing claims like “All Americans are criminals” or “All Russians are criminals,” as these attack people on the basis of national origin.
However, in the case of attacks based on national origin, we also recognize that sometimes speech may be intended to be a critique of a state rather than an attack on people based on their national origin and that this may require additional context to enforce. We are also aligned with the Board’s observation that sometimes people may use this type of language against proxies for states, governments and/or their policies, such as police, military, army, soldiers, government and other state officials and the Board’s perspective that our Hate Speech policy should more clearly delineate this distinction.
As the Board notes in their decision, adjustments to our policies that are intended to address the nuance between attacks on a state rather than people come with enforcement challenges at scale. We will consult with internal and external experts to consider the tradeoffs between expression and safety in these circumstances and align on any potential categorical changes. Following this, we may connect with our enforcement teams to evaluate how best to apply those changes at scale. As an alternative, we may consider improvements to our context-specific guidance to be applied upon escalation.
We will provide updates in future biannual reports to the Oversight Board on the status of any policy development related to our Hate Speech policy approach to criminal allegations.