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
The old South African flag is merely a collage of a bunch of other flags.
If the old flag is to be banned because someone feels that it is "racist", then all 4 of the flags that make up the old South African flag should be banned by association. That includes the British Union Jack.
A flag does not have feelings. It can not be defined as good or bad, racist or antiracist. It is an inanimate object.
One can not say that the Palestinian flag is worse than the Israeli flag, or the other way around. It is not the flags that wage the war.
The old flag forms part of the history of South Africa. Do not erase the country's history!
Keep allowing countries to use their flags.
It is apparent that some media platforms are not aware about the current political situation or platform in South Africa. Some platforms must update themselves about the truth in our country before making unjustified decisions, the current ANC movement apply apartheids laws against us in South Africa. Only those who vote for the ANC movement are allowed to participate in our economy and are the beneficiaries of taxpayers money as well as employment. This does not have anything to do with race or colour but are based on "religion" as was the case during the "apartheids" government under NP rule. What is the sense of banning one flag while the existing flag represents much more than apartheid in South Africa comparing the status of two case studies, case study one from 1965 to 1994 and case study two from 1994 to 2024. Both the flags represent oppression from either side and should both been banned and replaced with a new flag which represents the freedom of our country rather than a typical type of propaganda or religion. There can never be freedom and peace as long as religion are been used to justify any wrong doing or evil within our country and globally. What is the Truth without reasonable doubt is that case study one was based on God's commandments and instructions and not based on human laws, although religion during this period was used to oppress as is the current case with the ANC movement. It is time for the world and social media platforms moving away from banning certain objects which is part and partial of our history and history cannot be ignored nor been deleted but are there for all to learn from as part of our education. Banning is yet another way of oppression without having or allowing the freedom of speech and freedom of association. It is not about what humans want, their opinion and views but for humans to understand the simple concept of unconditional love towards one another which is the opposite of religion which creates wars, antagonism, hatred, tears and blood shed. For this reason Elohim' gave us His commands to obey, respect and honour as humans and above all, He gave us His Son, Yeshua, Jesus Christ as our Saviour, Healer and Messiah because He never came to judge anyone but to save us from the judgement of any type of religion. The day the world leaders and media platforms understand John chapter 3 and chapter 16 the world will change because Matthew chapter 16 and Revelation chapter 13 defines religion the current condition of evil globally. Religion is about control and oppression without any freedom and must be banned because Elohim' is not religion, He is the Word of God as declared in Revelation chapter 19, maybe this will change the mindset of some people!!!
Greetings
I don't think the flag should be banned if it used for correctly. South Africa is a Country of heritage where all nationals and races preserve their heritage and history, the flag shouldn't be used as a sign of racism but to celebrate the achievements of democracy and unity of our citizens. It should also be used to educate the people of South Africa on the importance of multinational and multiracial society. Those who uses the flag on social media for racism reasons should be rehabilitated and be removed from social media space using the social media Security guides.
Thank you
The apartheid flag is part of our history and not being able to display it is taking my rights and freedom away. If Malema can shout kill the boer which is very racist and he was not punished then I should be allowed to display the old flag. You cannot take history away. Stop using the racist card. The ANC has brought this country to it's knees and cost people their livelihood. Nothing works and they took over a thriving country. No service delivery, state hospitals are disgusting, Eskom and SAA don't function properly, roads in disrepair, corruption/stealing and nothing gets done to claim the money back and jail the perpetrators, crime has escalated a thousand fold and there is no law and order and the list goes on so I wouldn't be proud of the new flag. At least with the old flag everything worked and even though apartheid was very wrong we had a country to be proud of. Now we have a country we are ashamed of and the ANC should be embarrassed and ashamed of what they have done to South Africa and the worst is what they have done to their own people abd especially those in live in squatter camps.
I believe that the display of the apartheid era flag on Facebook should not be banned or moderated in any way. As a South African I believe it is good to remember the good and the bad in our country's history, many good people fought and died under the flag even though many evils were also perpetrated. We should not forget that we owe most of our infrastructure to the Afrikaners and the apartheid era government. As a historical emblem it should not be banned, and especially as racists around the world tend to prefer using the swastika as their emblem, the old SA flag is almost never used as an emblem promoting racism.
It’s called freedom of speech.
It’s also called History. You cannot change history. It happened.
Everyone is going on about South-Africa “apartheid” but what about USA segregation laws which was similar to South Africa apartheid. Only difference the USA didn’t get a new flag!!
So sick of this apartheid this and apartheid that. It’s history it’s over. If everyone has this issue they can also have an issue with what the British did to South Africans (all ethnicities) during the Boer War. Two types of concentration camps. One for blacks and one for white. So think about it, the British started segregation also known as apartheid in south africa. So why don’t people hate the British just as much for their concentration camps? Oh yes that is a little part of history no one is taught!!
No, it should not be banned. It's part of the South Africa history.
Let's he honest, the situation about the "racist" hatred attitude against the Old SA Flag is from the hatred black Eff people of SA who hate whites. (apart hate). The Flag is a material item, not a person with a soul. It's plain stupidity to hate something that can do no harm. We grow up under these flag after 1962 and we all are proud of it.If so,then must the British flag also be hated cause the British Colonialism create the black apartheid in SA, since the Boerwar started, to reach their political rules to get rid of whites who stand in their way to take over SA, the mines, the minerals, the farms, the sea route etc. SA'ns after 1652 grow up by hardworking and build this Country up out of nothing. We SA'ns can then say, we hate the New SA, Anc flag too, cause it's the same colour as the evil Hamas, Hisbola terrorists and other Eastern Country flags of which the colours predict the 4 Horses of the coming end time appoccolips as prophesised in Revelation. So, those who hate a flag hate themselves.
South Africa's Apartheid Era flag may offend certain people. But nobody on the planet enjoys the right to never be offended. Freedom of speech is not limited to speech that does not offend people. Freedom of speech is only tested in cases where there is disagreement or offense. Nobody likes hateful and derogatory comments but they form part of all forms of human interaction and communication, both online and in in person.
We do not sanction people who insult others. We do not sanction people who show someone else the middle finger or some other offensive sign. We do not sanction the waving of either the Palestinian or Israeli flag, even though both flags are deeply offensive and provocative to the other side.
Displaying the old South African flag, however offensive or provocative this may be, should therefore not be sanctioned but be permitted as part of free speech. It is a real part of history that cannot be erased.
To some, it represents racism and the painful oppression of the Apartheid era. To others, it represents the Afrikaner cultural heritage and history. At the very least, the flag represents an important time in history which everyone should be aware of and learn about. It should not be up to a social media platform or a content oversight board to determine whether posting an image of this flag is wrong or right, and whether it is racist or not. It does not matter what the flag may or may not symbolize.
People should be free to post their political views and symbols, however unsavory, morally wrong, racist, or hateful they might be. If an oversight board starts limiting freedom of speech by censoring posts that the board does not agree with or that may offend certain people, we are on a slippery slope that leads to tyranny and totalitarianism.
As an employer, if somebody is racist or prejudiced, I would want that fact to be visible on their social media profile. If their profile is scrubbed clean by content moderators, you might think you're doing humanity a service but you're simply hiding that person's character and political views from the world, which in my opinion is a disservice to society and to employers.
However hateful and reprehensible the Apartheid Era South African flag and other similar controversial symbols are, it is even more reprehensible to ban them.
As a person who grew up during the terrible Apartheid era in South Africa, I personally deeply dislike the old South African flag. But I feel strongly that posting it or displaying it should not be banned or sanctioned.
That flag is a symbol of a painful time in South African history as the swastika bastardized by the Nazis is for descendants of the Holocaust. It does not represent our country at present, and anyone brandishing it is sending a clear message that they identify more with the apartheid era and its systemic segregation and bigotry, which I don't believe has a place in the South Africa of today.
It is ridiculous to ban the old South African flag - it is part of our history.
It is an historical flag. It predated the Apartheid Era and those policies coincided with the flag and have since been eliminated for the most part. It is exceedingly simplistic to ban it, it does not foster any sort of resilience or healing. History should not be banned or censored. People should face it, look it in the eye and use it to remind them - never again. Only tyrants, criminals, and cowards censor and ban. Which are you? If none, then leave what belongs in the public domain alone.
Banning a people's heritage amounts to cultural genocide.
Symbols of historic significance like the flag of the Republic of South Africa has a place in history and a place in the cultural and national heritage of Afrikaans speaking, white South Africans.
The popular misconceptions around our country and its rich history in the twentieth century should not be marginalised because of liberal bigotry and false claims -
Racism is an overt action by people who choose to do wrong.
That action should not be generalised or used as an excuse to perpetrate worse, by denying millions there rightful heritage.
The historical flags of countries is just that. Banning it does not erase history. In many countries history is respected and revered. However, in South Africa, the anc is hell-bent on erasing history. Especially history as it pertains to people of European descent. This serves only to deepen the divide and it is counter-productive. Build, don’t eradicate and destroy.
No, the flag should not be banned. If they want to ban the old flag then they must ban the ANC flag as it's a symbol of corruption, racism and oppression, then they must ban all communist flags and communist aligned flags as they represent a genocide of 200 million people world wide. That flag is part of history. This marxist racist rubbish of banning history is exactly why if they ban the old flag then the anc flag must be banned, all communist flags must be banned, all flags associated with corrupt institutions in South Africa must be banned. The Zulu flag must be banned as the Zulu slaughtered millions of people. The Xhosa flag must be banned as they slaughtered millions of people. Cosatu flag must be banned as they are a symbol of corruption and extortion. The list will continue. The old flag was from when whites built this country, the new flag represents crime, racism , corruption, terrorism, looting, so the ban the new flag as well.
Form a legal and symbolic perspective, this is a bad idea. 1.Symbolism Associated with the Flag, The Association with Oppression: The old apartheid-era South African flag is widely seen as a symbol of racial segregation, oppression, and white supremacy. It evokes painful memories for many South Africans, particularly Black citizens, as it represents a regime that systematically denied basic rights to the majority of the population. Undermining National Unity- Displaying the flag in public can be interpreted as a rejection of the democratic values and reconciliation efforts embodied by the new South African laws and flag, which represents unity and inclusivity. This act could stoke racial tensions and perpetuate divisions within society. The Historical Context,- While some may argue that it is a part of South Africa’s history, the symbolism has evolved. Today, its display is often associated with far-right ideologies and nostalgia for apartheid, making it more than a historical artefact but a tool for perpetuating exclusionary beliefs. 2. But here are the Legal Implications- ‘Public Display as Hate Speech’- In 2019, South Africa’s Equality Court ruled that gratuitous public displays of the apartheid flag constitute hate speech, discrimination, and harassment under the Equality Act. This decision legally frames the flag as a symbol of racial hate when displayed outside historical or academic contexts, recognising its harmful impact. It’s No Longer a State Symbol- The old flag no longer represents the South African state, which means using it in place of the current national standard could be considered a deliberate rejection of the constitutional order. This undermines the legitimacy of the new flag as a unifying national symbol, potentially violating laws against acts that promote social division or disorder. The Breach of National Symbols Act- In some cases, displaying a former or alternate flag in ways that substitute the current national standard might violate the legal protections around national symbols. Such actions could be seen as an attempt to delegitimise the current government and the democratic values it represents. So, while arguments can be made about free expression, the flag’s potent symbolism and legal precedent surrounding its display create a strong opposition to its public use.
No, do not ban. People still have rights, freedom of speech, etc.
Then the Nazi flag should be banned as well as any flags from countries that are communist or undemocratic. This includes the American flag for their segregation and slavery laws as well as their treatment of Native American people.
Everyone has their own opinion.
If you start banning flags, where do you draw the line?
This whole issue begs the question: why do people feel threatened or disturbed by a flag that lost it's relevance more than three decades ago? That flag also reminds people that we used to live in a prosperous and safe country with food for all. It also reminds people how hard we fought, how many sacrifices were made on both sides of the colour bar before we could hoist that flag. That flag also represented a growing economy, an army, navy and airforce second to none, it represented growth with strong and functioning parastatels and an effective police force. Why would we be ashamed of it, or bury it. It means nothing to the current, corrupt and highly inefficient government who allowed this country to fall apart, allowed it's economy to fail and leaves us in the dark with power failures and with no consistent water supply.
Why should the wokeness of one or two cry babies become an international issue? The flag is no longer of consequence, except to those who grew up with it, learnt to respect and revere it and all it stood for. Will we never stop catering to the wokeness of every overly sensitive soul out there. Good grief, leave some space if you please, for normal people with normal responses and normal resilience to the little upsets in life.
Flag should be allowed.