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
Multiple Case Decision
2024-002-FB-UA, 2024-003-FB-UA
Australian Electoral Commission Voting Rules
The Oversight Board has upheld Meta’s decisions to remove two separate Facebook posts containing the same screenshot of information posted on X by the Australian Electoral Commission, ahead of Australia’s Indigenous Voice to Parliament Referendum.
Summary
Overturned
2024-026-FB-UA
Dehumanizing Comments About People in Gaza
A user appealed Meta’s decision to leave up a Facebook post claiming that Hamas originated from the population of Gaza, comparing them to a “savage horde.” After the Board brought the appeal to Meta’s attention, the company reversed its original decision and removed the post.
Summary
Multiple Case Decision
2024-024-FB-UA, 2024-025-FB-UA
Thai Hostage Negotiator Interview
The Board reviewed two Facebook posts containing near identical segments of a Sky News video interview with a Thai hostage negotiator describing his experience of working to free hostages captured by Hamas. After the Board brought the appeals to Meta’s attention, the company reversed its original decisions and restored each of the posts.
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.
