केस विवरण
In May 2024, two Facebook users separately posted images showing the former national flag of South Africa. This flag, which became associated with the country’s apartheid system of racial segregation, was replaced in 1994 by a new national flag. The two Facebook posts were shared in the run-up to South Africa’s General Election on May 29, 2024, during which immigration, inequalities and unemployment were key issues.
The first post shows a soldier carrying the pre-1994 flag. The image, which appears to have been taken during the apartheid years (1948-1994), is accompanied by a caption encouraging others to share the post if they “served under this flag.” The content was viewed more than 500,000 times and shared more than 5,000 times. The post received numerous comments, with many suggesting that South Africa was a safer country during apartheid, while others emphasized the suffering experienced by people during those years. By the time the Board selected this case, three users had reported the content to Meta, for hate speech and violence. Following human review, the content was found to be non-violating and left on Facebook.
The second post contains multiple images of a previous era, including the country’s former flag, a nostalgic picture of a seaside theme park, a packet of candy cigarettes, a toy gun and a black man on a bicycle ice cream cart, with white children next to him. The caption expresses fondness for the previous era and asks the audience to “read between the lines,” followed by a winking face and an “OK” hand emoji. While in most instances, the OK hand emoji is used by people to show approval or agree that something is okay, this symbol has been adopted by some as an expression of white supremacy. The post was viewed more than 2 million times and shared over a thousand times. Many users commented on the post, positively describing life during apartheid, including on law and order. Other comments noted that it was not a good time for all. Within a week of posting, 184 users reported the content, mostly for hate speech. Some of the reports were reviewed by human reviewers, who determined that the content did not violate the Community Standards. The remaining reports were processed through a combination of automated systems and prior human review decisions. The content was kept up on the platform.
When the Board selected this content, Meta’s policy subject matter experts reviewed both posts again and the company confirmed that its original decisions to keep both pieces of content up on Facebook were correct.
In their statement to the Board, the user who reported the first post stated that South Africa’s former flag is comparable to the German Nazi flag and that “brazenly displaying” it “incites violence” because the country is still reeling from the impact of “this crime against humanity [apartheid].” The user also stated that sharing such images during an election period can encourage racial hatred and endanger lives. Similarly, the user who reported the second post explained that the “context of the post suggests” apartheid was a “better time” for South Africans and that such use of the flag is illegal. The user also emphasized how the former flag represents oppression.
The Board selected these cases to address the issue of glorifying or praising hateful or racial supremacist ideologies, including through the use of symbols, especially in the lead-up to an election. Such content can have public interest value, e.g., to raise awareness about or condemn an issue, but it may also be used to glorify or incite racial discrimination or violence. These cases, which provide an opportunity to evaluate Meta’s current approach on this issue, fall within the Board’s strategic priorities of Elections and Civic Space and Hate Speech.
The Board would appreciate public comments that address:
- The sociopolitical context in South Africa, in particular the nature of public and political discourse around apartheid and racial inequality, including in the lead-up to the 2024 elections, the impact of displaying the apartheid flag since 1994, and the role of supremacist and apartheid-sympathetic groups in social and political life.
- The coded use of online symbols, such as the ‘OK’ hand emoji and other symbols adopted by white supremacist groups on social media in South Africa and/or globally.
- Approaches to moderating visual content involving potential implicit attacks against groups with protected characteristics, particularly in contexts where there is a history of racial segregation.
- Risks of over-enforcement of removing hate symbols at scale, as well as analysis of least intrusive means among digital tools (beyond removals and geoblocking) that are available in content moderation to address hate symbols.
As part of its decisions, the Board can issue policy recommendations to Meta. While recommendations are not binding, Meta must respond to them within 60 days. As such, the Board welcomes public comments proposing recommendations that are relevant to these cases.
टिप्पणियाँ
I do not think that it is expedient to ban a historical flag no matter the history attached to the flag, however if the flag is used to promote hatred or a racist or political cause in a post, then I cannot see why a post cannot be removed on those grounds on an individual basis. If it is included in a post for historical context then I support it being allowed as we cannot expunge our history no matter how uncomfortable a subject it may be. Obviously this has to be sensitively handled.
Why ban it? It's part of the history of South Africa.
Why must the flag be banned? It is part of our history. Why must we who were born under that flag and cherish the positive side of everything that that flag represent be punished and forced to only except what came after 1994. There are thousands of us who believe apartheid was wrong but still respect and cherish our own history.
You cannot wish all wrongs away by destroying history.
Meta should ban all apartheid-era flags. The flag is symbolic of dividing racial lines and oppressing people of African-descent in their own land. It means something which is discriminatory and prejudice in nature and triggering for those that lived through that period or suffer the consequences. It is the equivalent of displaying nazi signs in Jewish communities, deeply offensive and triggering. It is a form of hate speech and should be dealt with swiftly across the board without prejudice.
I don't see the flag as hatred, it's a part of South African history. History shouldn't be banned.
No, I do not believe it should be banned as it is, whether you like it or not, PART of SA Inc history. There are other things which could also be banned eg Racism, etc.
Most people with a modicum of intelligence would ignore it anyway. I am a proud South African who is patriotic to the NEW flag, National Anthem and Constitution.
Good day
South Africa has had four national flags since it's unified status in 1910.
- The first was the Union flag 'South African red ensign' which lasted until 1928,
- which was changed for the first 'Oranje, blanje, blou' until 1982 (with a darker blue stripe),
- changed again by making the blue stripe lighter,
- changed again in 1994 for an entirely new flag.
The pre 1994 flags only represent the results of the 1910 Union of South Africa, itself a representation of the outcome of the Second Anglo-Boer War of 1899-1902. Neither of the flags represent apartheid or any other ideology, except if a person is to read deeply between the lines and makes substantial inferences based on contemporaneous events.
The post Union flags represent unification as much as the 1994 flag does, which itself has deep reference to what was represented in the Oranje-blanje-blou flags of old. The context merely differs. That said, even the pre-1994 flags were highly controversial between English and Afrikaans speaking individuals for their own perceptions of 'what the flag represented'. Moreover, thousands of people died fighting against the Axis under the dark blue version of the Union flag in WWII, and many other died fighting fighting under the lighter blue version for what they subjectively believed was a good cause in the Border War (and this includes some black soldiers).
The end result of all this history really shows that a flag can mean whatever the viewer wants it to mean. It is so inherently subjective that it becomes meaningless to fuss over. It is nothing like the significance swastika of post 1933 Germany, which I do not support banning either, and just shows the much ado about nothing nature of a flag that meant, and still means, a lot of different things to a lot of people.
The old South African flag existed before apartheid was even devised. It was just kept without change during the 46 years of apartheid. When 1994 changed the flag, it was to give people a new symbol for unity. It wasn't to remove a legacy or symbol of apartheid because the flag was just a flag from before that time.
This is such an unnecessary drive to erase history. Apartheid was terrible but how will future generations learn from the past if everything that some might find offensive is removed from the history books? On the flip side of the coin, in the same country where a flag is too offensive to display, songs are being sung, calling for the slaughter of farmers, but that is acceptable? This is total bias.
Back to the flag issue, this flag was birthed when all South Africans, black and white fought side by side against the British who wanted to colonise South Africa, and by removing the right to display a piece of cloth you are eliminating a part of history where all South Africans stood together against Britain!
The Apartheid Flag should not be banne, as it is part of our history, if this is banned, then a lot of history would have to be banned is well. History is there to remind, us to learn from it and make a better future.
Censorship of this type serves no purpose other than to appease a small group of overly-sensitive individuals. I have no love for - nor allegiance to - the old South African flag, but to ban it is absurd.
On the one hand I understand that many people feel emotional about this flag but on the other hand it is part of the history of South Africa.
If we hide history away we can never learn from it.
If it is hidden people will deny it ever happened.
We do more harm to the people who suffered as a result of apartheid by pretending something never happened.
The truth must prevail. It could be posted as sensitive and the viewer would have to click on it to view it if people do not want it to be in their face.
Banning things has never resulted in any amount of good. Extremists are exactly that. And sadly, they will always exist.
As a South African, I urge you to NOT ban it. Let them show it. Let them act out. At least this way, we know who they are, and we as South Africans can extricate them from our social circles. As a wise old lady once told me:
"Let the stupid be publicly stupid. Let them be the example of how not to be. Anyone stupid enough to follow them, is exactly that: Stupid."
Rather than banning them, give us the means to mock them. In the way you have a like button, put a button on their groups that allows one to say something to the effect of: I'm not stupid enough to be a racist.
Please, let them keep their flag, let them display it. Let them shout their convictions from roof tops. There is a tremendous amount of value, in knowing who the close-minded people are.
The old SA flag is a piece of our history and should be displayed proudly. There is nothing in its history that could be taken as signifying Apartheid. The flag predates the National Party and actually signifies compromise between English- and Afrikaans-speaking groups.
Attempts to ban historical imagery is censorship, plain and simple. Such ridiculous and uninformed proposals should be treated with the contempt they deserve.
The Apartheid-era flag should be banned on all social media platforms.
Why should a picture of an old country flag bother you? Perhaps you are, in fact, the racist. It is a part of history and is in the same league as any banners or flags that the ANC, Communist Party or any other group are displaying all over! The process is called 'history' and even if you ban it, you cannot change it!
The flag in question was established in 1928, 20 years before apartheid began in 1948, and represented Britain, the Orange Free State and the South African Republic.
In 1994 the flag was changed, but some people associated the flag change with government change, thinking incorrectly that political party was affiliated with national flag.
The current flag is not representative of the ANC government.
For historical accuracy, factuality, and the retention of Afrikaans culture (and South African culture), it should be very clearly established that the old flag did not originate during Apartheid, it was not created for Apartheid, and it has no discriminatory implications.
I humbly submit my support for permitting and allowing the use and display of the old South African flag along with strongly encouraging open and respectful dialog to educate citizens about the origin and meaning of the flag - it does not represent Apartheid.
I thank you for considering my input.
People have the choice to display South Africa's history Good or Bad.
30 years after the end of apartheid, South Africa still struggles with deep wounds as a result of its turbulent and nightmarish past. As a white person, I cannot even begin to imagine the pain so many people suffered under that regime.
Every time I have seen the old national flag displayed it has never been in the spirit of unity or raising awareness. It has always been in the spirit of calling back to what they believe were “better times”. This is both ignorant and hurtful for those who suffered immensely under a hateful and brutal regime.
In my honest opinion, the displaying of this flag should not be allowed in any forum, social media or otherwise. I would support the banning of the old South African flag without hesitation.