Case Description
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.
Comments
The old South African flag should absolutely NOT be banned for display on social media. Th old flag is part of history, and history should not be deleted or rewritten to suit anyone’s agenda. That flag not only tells us about the negative part of SA history, but also tells us of a time that the SA Rand was equal to the dollar, and a once thriving country.
I believe history is something you cannot change. Banning something like the old South African flag is like breaking down old churches or statues. Keep the history there. Good or bad, it is part of us.
Yes,it should be banned because it is a reminder of wickedness perpetrated to other human beings, who did no wrong but suffered for who they are and never applied to be who they are. Above all, apartheid has ripple effects that most South Africans are still experiening on daily basis of thier lives.
And those that are still filled with wickedness showing no remose,there are two things for them, it's either they repent or they will perish. Eternal Hell Fire is real and is waiting for them.
The old South African flag is an historical flag. Freedom of speech implies that we should allow it. Its historical and should be viewed as such, not as celebratory.
Thank you for allowing comment. Freedom of expression, speech, opinion and viewpoint is vital. Without it we are robots, unthinking, open to persuasion from all angles. No, that is not how I wish my current and future life to be. I make my own decisions. I formulate my own opinions and I have my own memories. Flags may represent something to someone, but in the end, they are merely colourful rags created to cause tension and upset emotions. Humans tend to cling onto familiar objects, things, habits... mainly out of fear of the unknown. South Africans had to adopt to an entirely new flapping rag because the other one didn't suit the outlook of the 'new' leaders. However, nothing really changed. Personally, the old flag was familiar because it was around in my childhood - yet, the new flag doesn't float my boat either. I link patriotism and pride for my country and it's leaders in the tangible contributions they bring during their tenure. Things such as, uplifting the poor, improving infrastructure, increasing GDP, reducing expenditure, improving animal rights, providing reliable resources, keeping costs affordable - in other words, making life bearable for the citizens who voted them in. Not visa verse, as has been seen since the current SA Government took power. So, in my opinion, let the old SA flag show it's face - let us be reminded of days gone by that, yes, were harsh in some aspects, but in many aspects were not. Days when the country worked well and our economy was self-sustainable. I have spoken to many low-income gardeners in my previous profession and 9 out of 10 told me "... bring back the past, but without the harsh discrimination and restrictive laws..." I say, "YES! absolutely" - that is the way to go! They are the perfect example of the proverb 'hear it from the horse's mouth', the very people whose parents/grand-parents suffered under the delusional views of the then ruling party (mind you, there are very very similar delusions being seen nowadays...) tell me, someone who is polar opposite to them in sex, culture, language and race, that the ways of the 'old' South Africa were in essence better than the present 'new' South Africa. Such a shame that things are like they are now. A great shame. Therefore, a flag means very little when the people who respond to it have completely different opinions, needs, desires and dreams than what the people in power expect. The handful who reported the two cases as "hate speech" are possibly bordering on extreme and being over-emotional. They forget that their outrage and dredging up of the past does not help matters. The newer, younger generations of South Africans are not being allowed to forgive and grow; not being allowed to learn and transcend; not being allowed to mature and contribute properly to the country (i.e. go to school, find work, earn money and, pay taxes). A flag is just another form of control and if certain people want to fall under its spell, then so be it, it's their choice, but I opt out of that. The Facebook users who reported the posts as "hate speech" are the ones who incite. Why victimize the ice-cream man, it was a job, he was earning a living. Someone had to do it. There weren't many corner shops selling ice cream back then. To blame the white kids in the photo is just as bad - they didn't know any better. And, as for a white emoji icon being seen as white supremacy... wow, I didn't know that! Ridiculous notion. Please don't let a few individuals mess it up for the many. Ideally, we should be able to look at both these flags and accept them for what they can teach us - both have pros and cons. Nothing and no-one is perfect. Good luck!
I do believe it should be banned on public social media sites. It not simply a question of banning it because it's the apartheid flag. It does represent history. I grew up under that flag. To me, the reason it should be banned, is in accordance with the law verdict about it as well, and that's the way it's actually used.
It's NOT used to signify purely history. In almost all cases I've seen it displayed on Facebook, it's used to antagonise previously disadvantaged folks or anyone who didn't benefit from that era.
It's always some racist dude's profile or cover pic. Or on some vile meme stating that that era was SA's prime, or that only people who swear allegiance to it matter, or the vilest reason, that the current flag is racist and worthless.
So it's not about the actual flag, it should be banned outright because of who, and how, certain ignorant folks use it now....
The previous South African flag is part of South Africa’s history, it can and will never be erased. As a country, we must be proud of our past, because that shaped us as a nation today.
What should be banned are racist songs, sung by die EFF, that call for violence and domestic terrorism.
South Africa has a history of suppression, wich is forgotten or unaware of, by many South Africans. for example Chaka and his Zulu nation either killed or suppress the smaller nations around them, Nzilikazi and the Ndebele people did the same, so did the English when they occupied Southern Africa and the Arikaners when they came into power in 1948.
The history of a country cannot be changed and the people of a country must take what was good in their history and build on it. What was not good, must be taken note of and make certain not repeat it.
Every phase in the history had symbols. Just after 1948 there were many Afrikaners who wanted the British flag to be removed from the Union flag. It did not happen because the majority felt that it was part of the South African history.
To have a fight about the old South African flag, is to try to wipie out history, which is not possible. It someone is sensitive about the old flag, bear with it, in South Africa we must learn to bear with things we do not like, but may have some meaning for someone else. If is the flag is removed form Facebook, nothing other than the flag is removed and maybe someons else is hurt or sensitised. If we can bear with our differences, we are building a true rainbow nation where we make space for each other, create living space for all, boost respect for each other and live in peace together while putting South Africa first.
If we choose not to do it and remove the old flag, we are killing the rainbow nation, which battles in any case to grow, we will get the way of some, but hurt some others. Exactly this is poison for living in peace together and become what we ungently must become: A true rainbow nation.
Old flag should not be band, it is part of our heratage that should not be destroide. It has nothing to do with "appartheid".
No country should throw their history away. It's what define us, it's learn from mistakes and build on the good that should happen. Just maybe South Africans should build a bridge over apartheid and the latest racism and come over it. We should stand together, leave all our histories as memories that should not be repeated. ANC should stop their racism against all races, they are only there for black people but when it comes to money they make their own people beggars by grants for everything, taking away their dignity. Every person should be allowed to work for money. Fill a pothole and get your grant. Clean up a mess in a street and get your grant. South Africa had become one big rubbish dump. What for? Why?
IT SHOLD BE REMOVED WE NEED TO PUT THE PAST BEHIND US AND MOVE FOWARD
The flag represents the end of colonialism and the break away from the British. It is a part of history whether people like it or not. You cannot and should not ban it just because you don't like it. It represents many more things than just Apartheid. There are a multitude of creeds, cultures and races who have fond memories of the flag that are completely secular to the evils of Apartheid.
All historic flags should be allowed to be shown. All history should be allowed to be told. Stating facts should be allowed even if these might be hurtfull to the affected individual/ group, but ALL PUBLIC teaching, preaching or slogans inciting violence to a race, individual or group of people MUST be punished under Common Law.
For many people in South Africa the old South African flag represents apartheid which they perceive as negative. This is understood and appreciated, and the use of the old flag is not permitted in public news media, magazines etc.
Facebook is not such a medium. It is a special world-wide platform that an individual may choose to join or not join and has certain rules.
On Facebook are many individuals with widely differing lifestyles, beliefs, opinions and backgrounds. For many South African citizens, the old flag has a particular meaning and is regarded as part of their culture and history. Facebook is probably the only place where they can communicate with their friends and family without fear, favour or prejudice.
They should be able to use it, as long as it is not used in a derogative manner to upset other FB members.
I really do not believe that the scrapping of the pre-94' South African flag has absolutely anything to do with fueling racial hatred or is hate speech at all. In my opinion, it is simply the "new" South Africa trying to totally eradicate anything that can be tied to the 'old' South Africa. That in itself is an expression of hatred and intolerance. The 'old' flag in my opinion as a 64 year old South African makes me proud to be South African. It is a beautiful flag and should NOT be done away with. It represents the country I grew up in. Yes, there was apartheid but the flag was not the cause of that. There was a beautiful, working South Africa pre-94' and you cannot eradicate that memory so why feel all offended because the flag flies? If you do eradicate the flag, why stop there? If you want to eradicate any and everything that can be seen as hate speech or fueling racial division, you have to totally eradicate EVERYTHING that is tied to the 'old' South Africa. There is a lot that I, in this "new" South Africa, feel offended by but life goes on.
While I can understand that the old flag may illicit a negative feeling for some of our population, denying its existence, is also denying our history as a country and denying history does not allow you to gauge how far we have come.
To be honest, there were a lot of good things that were happening during the time and there should be a sense of pride regarding the fact that things actually worked then. Also, looking back at the complete history of a country helps us to understand each other better, and by oppressing the history, there is just a reversal of the problems of the past.
Unfortunately, the government that has been in power since the country got a new flag have not exactly bathed themselves in any form of glory by excellent performance that in any way contributes to the betterment of the South African public in general, and especially the poorer South Africans in specific.
There are good and bad that can be related to the history of both flags. Can we as the people of South Africa not just strive to extract the positive from both eras and reject the negative from both eras in our history, while still giving the individual periods the respect they deserve for the things that they did that worked, and contributed positively to the country?
The old South African flag was used since dependance in 1961 from the UK. It also displays the British involvement in the flag. This flag was replaced in 1994 when South Africa became an all-inclusive country. The flag is a symbol of an era and history of how South Africa was formed and developed. You cannot erase history by banning elements that somehow offend a small minority of the people. If we start banning things that offend some people, we will be left with nothing. The flag is a piece of cloth and cannot be racist, only people can be racist. The same argument can be used about the US flag, stars and stripes and the old Confederate flag. The old Confederate flag is not banned as it is part of the history that snaped the US. Thus, the old South African flag is part of the South African history that shaped this country in what it is today, and should not be banned.
Leave it there, that is people's choice. This would be perceived as a dictatorial action which may upset some people.
It is not the old SA flag that worries me. It is the double standards!! Some people literally getting away with murder. I wonder what would happen if White people started singing "Kill the Black, kill the (K-word)"? That is what causes racial HATRED in this country. Ban the old Flag, but there should be one standard. Ban the singing of "Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer" as well. Let me tell you what I see when I look the ANC Flag. I see a Zulu Spear a Shield and an Oxcart wheel. That reminds me off my forefathers (the voortrekkers) getting killed at night and their baby's heads getting smashed against an Oxcart Wheels. So, are we going to Ban that flag as well? No, it was part of their history and part of their struggle! And, because there's double standards. Reversed apartheid is what I call it. Unless there is one standard for all, this country will never prosper as it can be!!!!
No, it should not