Technology

59217 readers

2726 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

206

Meta to broaden hate speech policy to remove more posts targeting 'Zionists' (www.middleeasteye.net)

submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

84 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Meta has said it will expand its hate speech policy to cover more uses of the word "Zionist" when applied to Jews or Israelis on its platform.

We will now remove messages targeting 'Zionists' in several areas where our investigation has shown that the term tends to be used to refer to Jews and Israelis, with dehumanising comparisons, calls to harm, or denials of existence," the company said in a press release on Tuesday.

In December, Human Rights Watch said that Meta was guilty of “systemic censorship of Palestine content” during Israel's war on Gaza.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That is exactly it. Antisemites figured out a while back that they could say whatever they want about Jews as long as they swap out the word Zionist. This has been a feature of white supremacy for ages. It used to be "people with big noses" or "people who wear hats" or even "bankers," or "globalists." The latter two are more similar to the use of "Zionist" because they represent actual groups that people criticize. That gives more cover to the actual antisemites.

This is actually a good thing, because it removes that cover from bigots who want to hijack the movement and hide behind it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Isn't it incredibly dangerous to ban "Zionist" only because it's misused? It can be used to legitimately describe people who have a vested interest in Isreal occupying Palestine. I understand it's used as a slur, but banning otherwise normal words will make the discourse much more difficult.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Who said anything about banning it? You can read the full statement here. As I said, this is about bigots co-opting the word to say bigoted shit, taking into account the nuance of how a word can be used or misused. Literally no one other than propagandists are talking about Meta "banning" the word.

We do not allow content that attacks people on the basis of protected characteristics such as nationality, race, or religion, among others. We do allow people to criticize adherents of political affiliations and ideologies.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

My apologies, I did not read the article on the assumption Meta would choose the irresponsible option. The article was surprisingly nuanced, and I hope the enforcement of Meta's policies are equally nuanced.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Yes, let's hope so!