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
Keep the flag displayed on facebook and wherever it can be displayed. It is part of the heritage of the majority (most) of the White race in South Africa and all over the world. It is also part of most of the Coloured race and even some of the Black race in South Africa’s heritage. Every race have the right to keep their heritage live, close and dear to their hearts and in their minds and to pass that heritage down to their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren, etc.
I believe the flag is an important part of South African history and should be allowed to be posted on meta sites as it serves as a reminder of the following:
1. That as an apartheid state, SA may have done some nasty stuff to its citizens
2. To remind us not to do that again
3. SA was once a powerful nation akin to some current day supernations and could get there again if we just all forgive the past and look towards the future.
4. If you erase the past how will future generations learn from our mistakes
History is a record (by whomever chooses to record it) of the past of our existence. Some good some bad some indifferent depending on how we define good bad or indifferent. If we cannot reflect on our past and learn from it all then we are bound to repeat the mistakes of the past and fail as societies. I see many posts reflecting atrocities all throughout our species existence and it highlights or even teaches us how not to behave with one another as a common so called intelligent species into our future existence. We must learn to accept these for all that it teaches to improve our lot in life and to how to live together in honour, peace and harmony with one another. expose the past atrocities as much as expose the present atrocities and hypocrisies so that we as a species can see ourselves naked in our self judgement vs a blinkered view of what we think is right or wrong or good or bad. No man is master over another!
Nothing wrong with old SA flag. Just beautifull history.
I see no point in banning history, history is what it is whether you like it or not. We can learn from history and move on, face the facts and strive for a better future.
People must get over their Apartheid, white supremacist, imperialist, Jan v Riebeeck colonialist, slavery hangovers. It is part of many country's history and people should not complain until they have a better solution of which the current regime is between 30 and 70 times worse than Apartheid, depending on which statistics are used. If is an easy game playing the victim and guilt tripping the minorities to pay restitution (by trying to remove history by burning, stealing, corruption, illegal immigration through poor border control, public sector capturing by criminals, AA, BEE, BBBEE, drugs and prostitution) and by doing so, you will never be able to move forward, only backward as proven over the past 30 years, hence the current poor living conditions we have to live in, because of non existent service delivery, bankruptcy, high unemployment rate and poverty.
I will not be censored by a far left radical organisation to display the flag which stood for law, order, christian values, family values, respect, freedom of speech and all good in life. While malema and the other racist commies can spew their racial hate openly without repercussions I will fly my flag openly without shame. This new censorship is a globalist push to force people to associate with others who openly call for genocide. So if meta want to be that kind of company then so be it, they offer no value in my life anyway. This is just going to ring the devision bell even louder. The owners of meta really think they are invincible and untouchable like their globalist and communist buddies.
The old South Afrian Flag ws the flag of the Republicof South Africa - it wa not the Apartheid flag. It preceded Aartheid and it didnot represent Aartheid, ot represented Suth Africa. Thinking that a historical geographic flag should be baned because it represt Apartehid would be the same a Saying that the Amerian flag should be banned because it represents Capitalism - or Socilism,depnding in which decade and under which politicalpoer is running the country.
If you ban the flag you are acting on false reason fordoing so. The Respublic of South Africa may have turned into an Apartheid state, but it alsoturned out of an Aparthid state and Apartheid no longer exists.
Juan Cronjé
I believe the old South African flag has as much right to be posted at will on Facebook as the British flag. Seeing that the British were the ones to first implement apartheid (segregation law) in South Africa. South Africa only became a independent Republic in 1961 and before that the segregation laws have already been implemented since 1913 while South Africa was under British rule. So the apartheid laws were in fact implemted longer by the Brits than the Afrikaner National Party by 15 years. But nothing is being said about where apartheid started. Now you want to try and wipe away history? You know you never will.
I think this is a really bad idea, since the flag of the former Republic of South Africa meant different things to different people.
It is - or was - a country flag and did nor necessarily signify any particulat ideology or governing partt, unlike other symbols of racism in South Africa at the time.
Elements of the old flag were in fact included in the new flag of the non-racial South Africa, so it does not make sense on any level to ban the 1961 - 1992 era South African flag.
The Board should acquaint themselves with the findings of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which was headed by Archbishop Desmond Tutu and exposed atrocities on the side of the apartheid government abd its agents at the time but also atrocities committed by the liberation movements.
Since year 2000, political significance has been attached to this blue and orange flag, which were not seen by the architects of the new non-racial South Africa.
Finally, we cannot simply airbrush the flag of the former Republic out of existence. Much like the flags of other unpopular regimes and movements such as Nazism, these things happened and cannot be undone.
It does seem, however, that moves to ban the old SA Flag from Facebook may arise not from the victims of apartheid themselves, but from what is referred to as the "Woke" movement, which is transient in nature. They are barking up the wring tree.
My response may be controversial to popular and current narratives.
My experience, having grown up during the pre and post apartheid eras, is as follows:
The propaganda narrative that fuelled intense hatred by the Black peoples towards the Whites was tragic to say the least. The narrative that is held by those who did not live in South Africa, who did not understand the complexity of the situation, who did not understand the purpose and what apartheid was, believe it was a hate-based law, which it definitely was not. I never grew up hating the Black peoples and throughout my lifetime, there were not many people that I met or knew of, who did hate the Black peoples, until the effects of the communist narrative took hold of the Black peoples, fuelling Black on White hatred and the resultant violent crimes against the White people. Propaganda that lied to the wonderful Black about our lives as White peoples, which sadly continues today.
At the time apartheid was implemented, it addressed certain issues at that time, including keeping tribal wars under some form of control and encouraged tribal people to maintain their culture and traditions. I grew up in rural KZN and still have wonderful memories of my time spent amongst the Black peoples. We lived in harmony with one another. The lie that the law was a hate-based law, is in itself a complete lie and a misinterpretation of the word apartheid, simply meaning, as we know, separate.
Was apartheid good? Not necessarily, but it addressed certain issues. Was apartheid evil, certainly not. It is a huge travesty for everyone, that such evil propaganda has fuelled hatred on both sides. As a result the, lives of all South Africans has been destroyed, except for a few, who have used the opportunity to enrich themselves and maintain the apartheid lie to this end. How shameful to destroy the lives of the people for their own selfish benefit.
Based on the above, ascribing a view that the old flag represents hatred is simply continuing to fuel false and wicked propaganda. The same propaganda, and probably even more justified, is ascribing the current flag to hatred of Black peoples toward White peoples. Now wouldn’t that fuel an outrage?!
Is it not time to stop all this propaganda and begin to start treating one another with respect? FB’s interference and fuelling this lie and propaganda is appalling.
Apartheid is declared Crime against Humanity.anything look like Apartheid must be erased
It is rediculous to think an old flag needs to be banned. What other history needs to be wiped out also?
The past is the past and we can`t change that. That flag has sentimental value to most people who grew up in that era, regardless of their political view. It reminds many people of the time of their lives when there was order, a strong currency and healthy economy. They didn`t make the rules, they were just living their lives.
It can`t be detached.
For instance, certain items make me think of my grandparents, even if I disliked those items, they are still part of my memories of my childhood. Why delete them if I or others dislike them?
Just let it be and focus on the future.
Too much controle isn`t condusive to peace and prosperity. Someone will allways be offended.
I do not see anything wrong with the old South African flag being displayed anywhere.
No, I do not believe the flag should be banned.
The "apartheid" flag is just part of this countries history. The flag depict the flags of the countries/colonies the country was formed from. Many of the people hated one or more of the countries who's flags form part of the flag, but through the years the hatred became a part of pride of the countries heritage. By banning the flag, the history of all it wrongs and rights becomes an emotional item that in itself stirs hatred between those that grew up under the flag and those few that feels "offended" by it. Many white, brown and black South Africans fought under the flag and died defending this country. Why should their memory and sacrifice be called hate speech?
Persons/Institutions/Countries that are still scared of flags are very insecure and immature.
The old South African flag is part of the history of the country and as a rule should not be prohibited.
If it is used in a context that is negative and intended to hurt others it should be removed, but just displaying the flag is not in my view negative. The people that fought to liberate South Africa from the Apartheid era should respect the flag, because it actually justifies the actions they took in fighting the regime.
It should be allowed, its part of history.