Case Description
Due to a technical glitch, our public comments portal for cases related to the "From the River to the Sea" phrase closed earlier than planned. To ensure everyone has a chance to share their input, we've reopened it for 24 hours. The portal will now close at 12pm BST on May 23rd.
These three cases concern content decisions made by Meta, all on Facebook, which the Oversight Board intends to address together.
The three posts were shared by different users in November 2023, following the Hamas terrorist attacks of October 7 and the start of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. Each post contains the phrase “From the river to the sea.” All three were reported by users for violating Meta’s Community Standards. The company decided to leave all three posts on Facebook. For each case, the Board will decide whether the content should be removed under Meta’s policies and according to its human rights responsibilities. Numbers of views and reports are correct as of the end of February 2024.
The first case concerns a comment from a Facebook user on another user’s video. The video has a caption encouraging others to “speak up” with numerous hashtags including “#ceasefire” and “#freepalestine.” The comment on the post contains the phrase “FromTheRiverToTheSea” in hashtag form, as well as several additional hashtags including “#DefundIsrael.” The comment had about 3,000 views and was reported seven times by four users. The reports were closed after Meta’s automated systems did not send them for human review within 48 hours.
In the second case, a Facebook user posted what appears to be a generated image of fruit floating on the sea that form the words from the phrase, along with “Palestine will be free.” The post had about 8 million views and was reported 951 times by 937 users. The first report on the post was closed, again because Meta’s automated systems did not send it for human review within 48 hours. Subsequent reports by users were reviewed and assessed as non-violating by human moderators.
In the third case, a Facebook page reshared a post from the page of a community organization in Canada in which a statement from the “founding members” of the organization declared support for “the Palestinian people,” condemning their “senseless slaughter” by the “Zionist State of Israel” and “Zionist Israeli occupiers.” The post ends with the phrase “From The River To The Sea.” This post had less than 1,000 views and was reported by one user. The report was automatically closed.
The Facebook users who reported the content, and subsequently appealed Meta’s decisions to leave up the content to the Board, claimed the phrase was breaking Meta’s rules on Hate Speech, Violence and Incitement or Dangerous Organizations and Individuals. The user who reported the content in the first case stated that the phrase violates Meta’s policies prohibiting content that promotes violence or supports terrorism. The users who reported the content in the second and third cases stated that the phrase constitutes hate speech, is antisemitic and is a call to abolish the state of Israel.
After the Board selected these cases for review, Meta confirmed its original decisions were correct. Meta informed the Board that it analyzed the content under three policies – Violence and Incitement, Hate Speech and Dangerous Organizations and Individuals – and found the posts did not violate any of these policies. Meta explained the company is aware that “From the river to the sea” has a long history and that it had reviewed use of the phrase on its platform after October 7, 2023. After that review, Meta determined that, without additional context, it cannot conclude that “From the river to the sea” constitutes a call to violence or a call for exclusion of any particular group, nor that it is linked exclusively to support for Hamas.
The Board selected these cases to consider how Meta should moderate the use of the phrase given the resurgence in its use after October 7, 2023, and controversies around the phrase’s meaning. On the one hand, the phrase has been used to advocate for the dignity and human rights of Palestinians. On the other hand, it could have antisemitic implications, as claimed by the users who submitted the cases to the Board. This case falls within the Board’s strategic priority of Crisis and Conflict Situations.
The Board would appreciate public comments that address:
- The origin and current uses of the phrase: “From the river to the sea.”
- Research into online trends in content using the phrase.
- Research into any associated online and offline harms from the use of the phrase.
- Meta’s human rights responsibilities in relation to content using the phrase including freedom of expression, freedom of association, and equality and non-discrimination.
- State and institutional (e.g., university) responses to the use of the phrase (e.g., during protests) and the human rights impacts of those responses.
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
This slogan generates a toxic environment for many Jews. Here I will explain why.
Let's dissect the slogan. “The River” is the Jordan River. “The Sea” is the Mediterranean. Between these lies the State of Israel and the two Palestinian territories of Gaza and the West Bank. The slogan began as a call to recognize the entire region from the Jordan to the Mediterranean as a single Palestinian state in which the State of Israel no longer exists.
Calling for a single state in this region, whether that be Palestinian or Jewish, polarizes the conflict and instead hinders progress towards a peaceful two-state resolution where both the Palestinian and Jewish nations, each indigenous to the Middle East, can live in their own states with self-determination.
What does it mean to call for a single Palestinian state "from the river to the sea"? The full intent is captured by two variations of the slogan used in Arabic. These translate as "From the water to the water, Palestine is Arab" and "From the water to the water, Palestine is Islamic". By using this slogan in their charter Hamas and some other Palestinian groups have indicated their determination to see the entire region become Islamic by removing millions of Jews from the region through extermination or deportation. Either way that is genocide and calling for it has no place on Meta.
But not everyone who uses this slogan is aware of the original meaning, and alternative meanings have sprung up. Some users of the slogan say they are calling for a single binational state from the river to the sea. Such a state would render Jews a minority and take away their right to self-determination in the only existing Jewish nation state.
Some counter that when they chant this slogan their intended meaning has nothing to do with political states, but rather with the people. It is a call for Arab peoples to be free with equal rights regardless of whether they exist in the two Palestinian territories or as citizens inside Israel’s borders (where Arab Israelis do receive full rights as full citizens). It is simply a call for Palestinian freedom. But the wording of the slogan does not mention Palestinians, it mentions Palestine, a geographic region. This is why the wording of the slogan is problematic regardless of the user’s personal intent.
Jews who interpret this chant as highly threatening are not being paranoid. Consider that a recent poll conducted by the Arab World for Research and Development (AWRAD) found that three quarters of Palestinians supported “a Palestinian state from the river to the sea.” That was the exact wording of the poll option. Palestinians chose this over options of a two state or a single binational state for both peoples. Hamas's Oct 7 terrorist attack was the most recent attempt to rid Jews of their homeland. While some may personally envision a message of peace when they use this slogan and its sister slogan "Globalize the Intifada", many Jews will understandably interpret these as support for the Oct 7 massacre.
These posts should be allowed on the basis of freedom of speech. Israel and zionists should not be allowed to label everything under the sky as antisemitic! Palestine was once a country that stretched on the geographical map from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea and hence the slogan 'from the river to the sea'. How does that call for any disgrace to any other country or religion?
Israel is openly committing a genocide and ethnic cleansing Palestine and the people can't even be allowed to chant or say 'from the river to the sea Palestine will be free'.
"From the river to the sea" is a phrase that calls for the recognition of the Palestinian people since the Balfour Declaration of 1917. This was Britain establishing a national homeland for the Jewish people. In 1948, the Israeli state was formed (Marsi, 2023). This year of 1948 brought upon the Nakba, also known as the Catastrophe, that drove more than 750,000 Palestinians from their home. This forced displacement has been a consistent movement by the Israeli regime for the past 76 years which has been a continued neglect of the Palestinian people's right to exist. The use of the phrase has risen with global protests calling upon governments, manufacturers, universities, and corporations to divest from Israel and calling for a permanent ceasefire. This is not a call for the erasure of the Jewish people, but instead proper recognition of the historic Palestine and all its inhabitants that included Arabs, Jews, Christians and Muslims. At this current time, Palestinians are using this phrase to continue to call for their liberation from ethnic cleansing and occupation from the Israeli government and military. These individuals have a right to live, yet have been denied that for years. They are not against the Jewish people, as jews were in Palestinian prior to the creation of the state of Israel. Please understand why the continued censorship of Palestinian creators is a media blackout tactic that minimizes the reach of historical and cultural context for the purpose of this phrase and the existence of the Palestinian people.
The full phrase to "From The River To The Sea" ends with "Palestine Will Be Free". This is calling for the freedom of the indigenous peoples of Palestine, who are currently suffering under Israeli occupation. This occupation has been deemed unlawful by the UN and has been going on since the six day war in 1967. According many human rights agencies, this occupation is considered an apartheid and has curtailed the rights and freedoms of all Palestinians inclusive of those the diaspora unable to return to their homes. This phrase has nothing to do with Israelis but simply calls for Palestinians to have the same rights as the Israelis do and for them to live with freedom. It calls for the liberation of Palestinians which is not antisemitic as it has nothing to do Jews. Israelis are free so why can't Palestinians be free.
You are aware this same sentence and phrase have been used by Netanyahu when he announced in to the camera. Dont you find this whole thing utterly hypocritical and stupid. Dont you know that your media are contributing in genocide of Palestinians and are proactivly erasing their history and identity? How do you lay down on your bed, knowing there are INNOCENT lives ripped away, burried under rubble and burned to crips by Israeli occupation force and say "this is just fine.. Lets censore those who speak against these crimes" MADNESS I and many tell you!
You may not accept this comment, but know that millions are feeling the same rage and gutter digust of your actions and you allyship with Israhell. May you see the Day when justice will prevail and Palestinians will have achieved their freedom from occupation, apartheid, and we the world free from dobbelstandard and hypocrisy!
Hello,
I support Meta’s decision that “from the river to the sea” is NOT inherently violent and does not cause harm to anyone. It is not antisemitic.
Stop silencing the genocide happening now in Gaza!!! You all have blood on your hands!! Innocent women and children are dieing!!! Stop censoring and silencing us!
“From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” The phrase is used to reference the lack of freedoms Palestinians have in the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, which includes the state of Israel as well as the Gaza Strip and the occupied territories of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
"That's what has to change. That doesn't mean that there should be any violence against Israelis.” This is a quote from Yousef Munayyer, head of the Palestine-Israel program at the Arab Center Washington D.C, and I agree with him.
Freeing people has no negative connotations and does not mean rights have to be taken by other people.
I think censorship is bad unless it is hate speech. I do not see any hate speech here.
Since its inception, the sentence has demanded a Palestine free from oppression and the system of apartheid, and Palestinian writers and politicians have only used it in this way.
Denying a people's call to freedom and their rights isn't something that anyone should be able to censor.
Remember also that it is being used by the Israeli government and officials and journalists as a call to ethnically cleanse all of historic Palestine of Palestinians
אני לא חושב שהקריאה " מהים עד הנהר" מאיימת עליי כיהודי או ישראלי, שלילת הסלוגן תהווה הפרה של חופש הביטוי.
“From the river to the sea” is not anti-Semitic and should not be censored in the media, nor should any other pro-Palestinian post be censored. In order to better our world, we need not be shielded from global realities. Censorship denies humans the opportunity to access empathy for one another and henceforth create positive change. Censorship of pro-Palestine posts positions other groups (i.e. Israelis) above Palestinians, further denying their humanity and blocking our access to empathize with their plight and work toward liberation. No media censorship of pro-Palestinian posts. No censorship of “From the river to the sea.” Free Palestine, end the genocide.
From the river to the sea is a call for liberation and freedom from occupation and genocide of the Palestinian people, this is not hate speech, removal of these words from Meta platforms would be intentionally harmful to the coverage of the international human rights violations currently playing out in Gaza
From the River to the sea is akin to "from sea to shiny sea." If we limit From the River to the Sea we must limit all sovereign groups metaphoric declaration of homeland.
From the river to the sea empowers a group of people who has been marginalized and attacked for nearly 100 years. It speaks directly to their experience. It is like Black Lives Matter. It is like Never Again.
While Don't Tread on Me doesn't speak to a marginalized group, it too is directly connected to the experience of one group.
If groups can no longer have mottos, slogans, what can they have?
The phrase "from the river to the sea" expresses an aspiration for freedom for all people in a certain territory (generally understood to include Isreal, the West Bank and Gaza). It is not hate speech.
While I personally discourage people from using the phrase because it is so often misunderstood, a look at both the origins of the phrase and its meaning by what appears to be the vast majority of people (at least in North America, where I am most familiar) is for a single democratic state where Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs have equal rights. For most people (though unfortunately not all) it is NOT a call for genocide or ethnic cleansing or anything of the sort.
In this article, linked below, I examine the history of the phrase, its various meanings, and how rightwing Republicans have disingenuously misinterpreted the phrase as a means of discrediting peace and human rights activists. There are dozens of citations within the article you can follow up on.
https://truthout.org/articles/dont-buy-the-right-wing-disinformation-campaign-on-from-the-river-to-the-sea/
If “from the river to the sea” is controversial and considered hate speech then so should “from sea to shining sea” — the exact same intentions from different groups of people. It’s a shame you even have to do this considering Meta’s history in covering up and enabling genocide.
If it’s not obvious to you now, it will be soon, Instagram isn’t more important than genocide. Facebook is definitely not more important than genocide. And TikTok is already beating you at the game you think you invented.
it’s over Meta, but you could do something incredible and stand for Palestine. Stand for humanity. Stand for justice. Stand with the people who’ve made you billionaires.
But i suppose the failed metaverse attempt must make your overlord, Zuckerberg, very pleased.
I do not believe the phrases “From the river to the sea,” “ceasefire, “defund Israel,” “free Palestine” or calls any other calls for Palestinian liberation or against Zionist Occupation should be considered hate speech. (And based on the reports of the specifically mentioned comments above only about .01% of people reported them as such)
If calls for a liberation of people from an occupying force are considered hate speech that means we have entered Orwellian doublespeak territory.
Israel is actively committing atrocities—with ongoing bombing, restriction of movement, restriction and denial of humanitarian aid, restriction of the media (not to mention specifically targeting media). Yet, we find ourselves restricted from commenting against Israel. Why are the people suffering such horrific atrocities considered terrorists? Why isn’t the state committing the these horrific atrocity against the original inhabitants of the land considered the terrorists?
Supporting Palestine does not mean supporting terrorism because this did not begin on October 7, it began in 1947/48 during the Nakba. Suppressing calls for a free Palestine is suppressing freedom and peace.
How is supporting the liberation of people held in an open-air prison (no airport, no freedom of movement, no passport) and treated as second-class citizen with restricted zones and humiliating checkpoints considered “hateful?”
Imagine if abolishing slavery in the United States was considered an “annihilation” of the confederacy or hateful speech against the confederacy instead of the freedom of enslaved Africans? I think we can all agree that that would be ridiculous.
These words are a call to liberate Palestinians from oppression and are not a call to violence or hate speech. In fact, quite the opposite. These words are meant to STOP violence and prohibiting their use means Meta supports, is complicit, or at least has turned a blind eye to violence and genocide against the Palestinean people in favor of saving some other people’s feelings.
Calling for freedom of a people is always something we should strive for. I've always advocated for freedom around the globe. The same courtesy should be granted to my people.
I believe the Jewish people have a right to live in their indigenous homeland. That homeland is Israel. The bible proves this and for those who are not bible readers or religious, the archeological sites, finds and discoveries prove this.
So when people chant “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” they are chanting that the land of Israel, which is the land between the river of Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea, be free of Jews.
This means expulsion or death of the Jews in Israel and the dismantling or destruction of the one and only Jewish country and state in the world.
This is a direct definition of genocide. Jews have been persecuted for thousands of years, they have suffered as a people more than any other. They deserve a place to call home, their own state, their own country, in their own indigenous homeland.
The use the phrase ‘From the river to the sea…’ should be banned because it is a vile, antisemitic, Jew hating call for the genocide of the Jewish people. We need to stop this now before it’s too late. We need to protect Jews, they have suffered enough.