Criticism of EU Migration Policies and Immigrants

Case Description

The Oversight Board will address the two cases below together, choosing either to uphold or overturn Meta’s decisions on a case-by-case basis.  

In the first case, an administrator of a Facebook page, which describes itself as the official page of Poland’s far-right coalition party, Confederation (Konfederacja Wolność i Niepodległość), posted a meme in May 2024. The image shows the country’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk looking into a door viewer (or peephole), with a black man walking up behind him. Polish text over the image says: “Good evening, did you vote for Platform? I've brought the black people from the immigration pact.” This is likely a reference to the European Union (EU)’s 2024 Pact on Migration and Asylum. Platform refers to Tusk’s centrist Civic Platform coalition, which came into power in December 2023 and is more closely aligned with the EU than the country’s previous government.  

“Murzynów,” the Polish word used to describe black people in the text, is considered offensive by some and subject to debate in Poland. The post’s lengthy caption states that the Tusk government agreed to the Pact, which it describes as “blackmail.” It also states that people who voted for Platform should feel “cheated” and encourages them to vote for Confederation in the European elections, which were held in June 2024, to stop immigrants being allowed into Poland and the EU.  

The post has been viewed over 150,000 times, shared over 400 times and has more than 250 comments. It was reported 15 times by users for hate speech but was left on Facebook following a human review by Meta.  

In the second case, a different user posted an image in June 2024 on a German Facebook page that describes itself as being against left-leaning and green groups. The picture appears to be AI generated and shows a blond-haired, blue-eyed woman holding up her hand in a stop gesture, with both a stop sign and German flag in the background. German text over the image says that people should no longer come to Germany as they don’t need any more “gang rape specialists,” due to the Green party’s recent immigration policy. This is followed by a link to an article on the German Parliament’s website, titled “Non-German suspects in gang rapes.” The post has been viewed over 8,000 times and shared over 100 times. Only one user reported the content, with Meta deciding to leave up the image after human review.  

After the Board selected this content, Meta’s policy subject matter experts reviewed both posts again. The company confirmed its original decisions to keep both pieces of content on Facebook were correct.   

In their statement to the Board, the user who reported the Polish content pointed out the term “murzyn” is now widely considered to be offensive and derogatory in Poland, as well as more broadly, and that its use perpetuates racial stereotypes and discrimination. The user who reported the German content said they believe the content claims all refugees are criminals and rapists. 

The Board selected these cases to address the significant number of appeals, especially from Europe, against content that shares views on immigration in ways that may be harmful towards immigrants. These cases also allow the Board to assess whether Meta’s decision to only protect refugees, migrants, immigrants and asylum seekers from the most severe attacks under its Hate Speech policy is adequate considering the company’s human rights responsibilities, which include protecting both vulnerable groups and political speech. These cases fall within the Board’s Hate Speech Against Marginalized Groups strategic priority. 

The Board would appreciate public comments that address: 

• Whether “murzyn” should be considered a slur term for the purposes of Meta’s Hate Speech policy. 

• The socio-political context in Poland, Germany and Europe more broadly, in particular attitudes to immigration and how it is discussed politically.  

• Any documented links between anti-immigrant speech and violence or discrimination in Poland, Germany and Europe more broadly. 

• How Meta’s Hate Speech policy treats migrant status and whether it adequately protects both the rights of migrants and freedom of expression. 

• Views on how Meta should distinguish commentary and criticism of immigration policies from direct attacks on people based on protected characteristics, such as race, especially during elections. 

In 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.