Case Decisions and Policy Advisory Opinions
The Oversight Board reviews Meta’s content decisions to see if the company acted in line with its own policies, values and human rights commitments. The Board can choose to overturn or uphold Meta’s decision.
Case Decisions
All three types result in binding decisions that Meta must implement.
Standard
In-depth review of Meta’s decision to remove or allow a post, which includes recommendations.
Summary
Analysis of Meta’s original decision on a post when the company later changes its mind, after the Board selects the case for review.
Expedited
Rapid review of Meta’s decision on a post in exceptional situations with urgent real-world consequences.
Standard
Overturned
2024-027-TH-UA
Statements About the Japanese Prime Minister
In the case of a user’s reply to a Threads post about the Japanese Prime Minister and a tax fraud scandal, it was neither necessary nor consistent with Meta’s human rights responsibilities for the content to be removed.
Standard
Multiple Case Decision
2024-048-FB-MR, 2024-049-IG-MR
Anti-Colectivos Content in Post-Election Venezuela
In this expedited case bundle, the Oversight Board reviews two videos containing violent language against the colectivos, state-linked informal armed groups in Venezuela, in the context of the protests following the July 2024 presidential elections.
Standard
Multiple Case Decision
2024-004-FB-UA, 2024-005-FB-UA, 2024-006-FB-UA
Posts That Include “From the River to the Sea”
In reviewing three cases involving different pieces of Facebook content containing the phrase “From the River to the Sea,” the Board finds they did not break Meta’s rules on Hate Speech, Violence and Incitement or Dangerous Organizations and Individuals.
POLICY ADVISORY OPINIONS
Meta can also ask the Board for guidance on specific issues through policy advisory opinions. These are integrated into the company’s policy development process.
