Meta Is Censoring Pro-Palestine Content, Human Rights Watch Finds

Follow us on Instagram, TikTok, and WhatsApp for the latest stories and breaking news.

The global organisation, which monitors and reports on human rights violations and promotes the protection of human rights in 100 countries, published the 51-page study on 20 December.

In its study, the human rights organisation found that the tech giant has "censored or otherwise unduly suppressed" more than 1,000 instances of "peaceful content" on Facebook and Instagram.  

"Meta’s policies and practices have been silencing voices in support of Palestine and Palestinian human rights on Instagram and Facebook in a wave of heightened censorship of social media amid the hostilities between Israeli forces and Palestinian armed groups that began on 7 October 2023," the report reads, describing Meta's censorship policies as "systemic and global".

1. Removing posts, stories, and comments.

2. Temporarily or permanently suspending accounts.

3. Limiting likes, comments, shares, or reposts of content from 24 hours to three months.

4. Limiting on follows or tags of other accounts.

5. Limiting the use of specific features such as live streaming, earning money, and suggesting accounts to non-followers.

6. "Shadow banning," where posts, stories, or accounts become less visible without notice, reducing their reach or preventing searches for the accounts.

The report states that these were "peaceful content in support of Palestine that was censored or otherwise unduly suppressed". 

In a statement to Mashable, an unnamed spokesperson for the tech giant said Meta's policies are to give all its users a voice while ensuring the platform's safety.

"This report ignores the realities of enforcing our policies globally during a fast-moving, highly polarised and intense conflict, which has led to an increase in content being reported to us. Our policies are designed to give everyone a voice while at the same time keeping our platforms safe.

"We readily acknowledge we make errors that can be frustrating for people, but the implication that we deliberately and systemically suppress a particular voice is false. Claiming that 1,000 examples — out of the enormous amount of content posted about the conflict — are proof of 'systemic censorship' may make for a good headline, but that doesn’t make the claim any less misleading," Meta's statement reads.