Meta’s Oversight Board, the independent group tasked with advising the company on content moderation practices, has called on Meta to clarify and provide additional details regarding its recently revised hate speech policies. In a statement issued on Tuesday, the Board criticized the company for announcing the changes without proper transparency and consultation, describing the rollout as hastened and divergent from established procedures.
Specifically, the Oversight Board requested that Meta evaluate the potential impacts of the new policies upon vulnerable user communities and release their findings publicly. Additionally, the Board recommended regular updates every six months regarding the effects and implementation outcomes of these policies. It further required Meta to engage in more extensive dialogue to reform its fact-checking protocols outside the United States.
This request comes on the heels of Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s decision earlier this year to significantly alter the direction of platform moderation toward encouraging broader free expression on Facebook, Instagram, and Threads. Part of this strategy included loosening previous safeguards against hate speech, particularly aimed at immigrant and LGBTQIA+ populations.
In response, the Board laid out seventeen distinct recommendations urging Meta to actively measure the effectiveness of its new “community notes” framework, clearly communicate its updated position concerning hateful ideological content, and strengthen enforcement against harassment. Also emphasized was Meta’s earlier commitment in 2021 to align its practices with the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, urging the company to proactively consult marginalized stakeholders affected by moderation policies—something the Board noted Meta failed to adequately undertake initially.
While the Oversight Board’s authority predominantly covers individual content-related cases rather than overarching corporate policy, Meta remains obliged to comply with the Board’s decisions regarding discrete moderation instances. The Oversight Board also indicated potential benefits to Meta formally referring broader policy issues through advisory referral mechanisms, a channel previously used to reconsider its moderation approaches.
In tandem with its general statement, the Board released rulings on eleven specific moderation appeals from across Meta’s platforms, involving anti-migrant rhetoric, hate speech targeting disabled users, and suppression of LGBTQIA+ perspectives. Notably, these latest changes by Meta did not significantly alter the outcomes of the reviewed cases, but the Board took issue with elements of the company’s updated stance.
Two U.S.-based cases involving videos of transgender women, flagged by users but initially retained by Meta, were upheld by the Board. Though it supported the content decisions, the Board advised Meta to remove the term “transgenderism” from its official Hateful Conduct guidelines.
Conversely, in three cases originating from Facebook posts related to anti-immigrant disturbances in the United Kingdom in summer 2024, the Oversight Board overturned Meta’s previous decisions to leave the controversial content live. The Board concluded that the company failed to act swiftly enough to remove posts clearly violating its policies on violence and incitement.
