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
I believe 'From the River to the Sea' is a vision of beauty and wholeness for the Palestinian people, a dream of connection to land and place-- of safety, true security for Arabs and Jews alike, and liberation. Palestinian people are undergoing immense violence and genocide, and losing their homes, and the environment they are connected to is being destroyed. Allowing this phrase to exist will bolster the continued survival and existence of Palestinian people and their homeland.
Further, I am very concerned by the limitations on free speech, and the implications that Meta is supporting with the review and ban of accounts that use this beautiful statement. From the River to the Sea is not hate speech, it is not anti-semitic. The often inverted ways the US country is defining hate speech during this reactionary era threatens our liberties, critical thinking skills, and my power as an author.
Please continue to allow from the River to the Sea to be used FREEly on all platforms.
This comment is calling for freedom for Palestinian people in their own land with EQUAL rights for Israeli people. It is not hate speech
We should be able to write "from the river to the sea" in our comments if we want to. I do not want my freedom of speech to be impacted.
Free speech is free speech, the amount of vitriol and hatred I see towards trans individuals, people of color and other disenfranchised minorities is not monitored or regulated in any way. If those people that say such abhorrent things are allowed to say whatever they want, then the same rules should apply for everyone, not just the vocal minority.
Our freedom of speech should not be infringed. We should be able to utilize social media to liberate people from a genocide. Not being able to share our thoughts on babies being murdered by bombs would infringe upon our first amendment freedom of speech.
Dear Board,
I strong oppose any effort to deny people the right to use the phrase, "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free." The phrase means exactly what it says: Palestinians should be free. I hope all people between any bodies of water become free. Free of oppression and harrassment.
sincerely,
Lew Williams
Please find comments from more than 100 Jewish lawyer moms supporting the argument that "from the river to the sea" is antisemitic here: https://ellenginsbergsimon.substack.com/p/letter-to-meta-regarding-the-use
This phrase has, since the 1960's, been used by both Israel and Palestine, so how can it possibly be anti-Semitic? I do know of fine, upstanding Jewish organisations and individuals who freely use the phrase and they will say it can be construed as anti-Zionist, which is a completely separate issue not being debated here, but never anti-Semitic.
Palestine existed from the river to the sea. It has been illegitimately divided plundered and allocated to colonisers. The whole area is Palestine. The only freedom from settlers is to have their land back from the river to the sea. Nothing antisemitic about getting ones own land back from thieves! How is this even controversial??!
This submission supersedes and replaces the comment submitted by American Jewish Committee on May 21, 2024.
American Jewish Committee (AJC) writes to address several points on which the Oversight Board has invited public comment: Uses of the phrase “From the river to the sea”; research into any associated online and offline harms from the use of the phrase; and Meta’s human rights responsibilities in relation to content using the phrase including freedom of expression, freedom of association, and equality and non-discrimination.
The phrase “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” can be intended to convey numerous ideas. The phrase, and derivative formulations thereof, have become prevalent in public discourse, including online and on social media, particularly since the Hamas-led attacks against Israel on October 7, 2023, and in the context of protests opposing Israel’s responding military operation in Gaza. Nevertheless, Meta’s automated systems did not send the majority of user reports about the three posts selected for this case by the Oversight Board for human review, and the one post which human moderators did assess was reviewed as non-violating.
The phrase should be considered to violate Meta’s Violence and Incitement policy when it is used to call for the violent elimination of Israelis and Jews. The phrase “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” can be used as a “coded statement [ ] where the method of violence is not clearly articulated, but the threat is veiled or implicit” that “acts as a threatening call to action by inviting or encouraging others to carry out violent acts,” specifically the carrying out of violent acts against Jews residing in the State of Israel in the pursuit of the violent annihilation of Israel, and/or the carrying out of violent acts against Jews around the world or against others who believe that Israel is a legitimate State and that Jews have a right to reside on its territory. This is certainly the sense in which the phrase is used by Hamas. The terrorist organization makes no secret of its commitment to the violent annihilation of Israel; it “rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea.” (Hamas Revised Charter 2017). Indeed, many Jews and Israelis, both of which Meta’s Community Standards protect, understand the phrase “From the river to the sea” to be a call for violent elimination of a Jewish homeland and its people. This belief has become more pronounced after October 7, when the Jewish people witnessed an attempted enactment of this aim.
The phrase also should be considered to violate Meta’s Hate Speech policy when it clearly constitutes a discriminatory attack against Jews, such as when the phrase is used with other language that indicates intent to deny Jews’ right to national self-determination in their historic homeland and implicitly or explicitly call for their exclusion or removal from Israel, including by denying Jewish historic connection to the land or falsely suggesting Israel is a colonial entity that the Jewish people illegitimately established in violation of the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people. In these and other contexts, use of this phrase is creating an environment that is harassing and intimidating to Jews and that impacts Jews’ ability to enjoy their rights.
The call for the establishment of a Palestinian State or advocacy for Palestinian rights are not harmful. AJC supports a durable two-state solution. Some who use the phrase emphasize that their call for Palestine to be free “From the river to the sea” does not require the eradication of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, but simply that all people of Palestinian heritage, wherever they reside, have their rights, culture, and freedoms honored. We have heard this in spaces of Muslim-Jewish dialogue, academic debate, and elsewhere. Content that does not denigrate the rights of Jews and Israelis does not pose a threat to Jews or violate Meta’s policies. However, too often, the phrase is instead accompanied by indications of harmful intent.
AJC considers it critical that Meta remove content using the phrase on its platforms in contexts in which its spread is likely to give rise to harmful consequences for Jews. Specifically, we recommend content that uses the phrase “From the river to the sea” be removed when it appears alongside (a) text, images, or symbols signaling violence, including references to organizations that advocate for Israel’s violent destruction like Hamas and their leaders, members, or insignia or other symbols associated with them, or (b) text, images, or symbols signaling a call for discrimination against Jews, including the exclusion of Jews (or “Zionists,” as a proxy for Jews or Israelis), from social groups, political institutions, professional settings or the territory of the State of Israel itself.
II. Current uses of the phrase: “From the river to the sea.”
The phrase “From the river to the sea,” refers to the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. It includes the entirety of the territory of the State of Israel (in addition to the West Bank and Gaza, which are not a part of the State of Israel). In its Resolution 181, adopted in 1947, the UN General Assembly called for the creation of independent Arab and Jewish states in the land west of the Jordan River, which for decades had been governed by Great Britain under a mandate, first, from the League of Nations, then the UN. Before this time, the same land was governed by another non-Palestinian and non-Jewish entity, the Ottoman Empire. However, from the moment of its declaration of independence on May 14, 1948, some actors have rejected the legitimacy of the State of Israel and sought its violent elimination. The origin of the phrase “From the river to the see, Palestine will be free” is disputed, and current uses of it vary. However, among its most prominent uses is as a rallying cry by violent groups that seek Israel’s annihilation.
Key among these is Hamas, whose leaders have repeatedly reaffirmed their intention to engage in “resistance by any means necessary” – including armed force against civilians as we saw before, on, and since October 7 – to accomplish the eradication of Jews from the territory of the State of Israel. In a December 2012 speech, Khaled Mashaal, then the head of Hamas’s political bureau, said: “...Palestine is ours from the river to the sea and from the south to the north...There will be no concession on any inch of the land...” The organization’s 2017 revision of its Charter asserts: “Palestine is a land that was seized by a racist, anti-human and colonial Zionist project that was founded on a false promise (the Balfour Declaration), on recognition of a usurping entity and on imposing a fait accompli by force.” “Palestine symbolizes the resistance that shall continue until liberation is accomplished, until the return is fulfilled and until a fully sovereign state is established with Jerusalem as its capital.” “Palestine, which extends from the River Jordan in the east to the Mediterranean in the west and from Ras Al-Naqurah in the north to Umm Al-Rashrash in the south, is an integral territorial unit. It is the land and the home of the Palestinian people. The expulsion and banishment of the Palestinian people from their land and the establishment of the Zionist entity therein do not annul the right of the Palestinian people to their entire land and do not entrench any rights therein for the usurping Zionist entity.” “Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea.”
Hamas remains committed to the violent overthrow of the State of Israel and the eradication of Jews from it. Its motto for its 35th anniversary year, announced in December 2022, was “Palestine from the river to the sea,” accompanied by a logo including a map of the entire area of land from which Israel is absent. Following the horrific attacks it led against Israel on October 7, 2023, Hamas representatives affirmed their intention to continue to seek Israel’s destruction. One told a Lebanese news program on October 24, “The al-Aqsa Flood [the name Hamas uses for the October 7 terrorist attack] is just the first time and there will be a second, a third, a fourth... Israel is a country that has no place on our land. We must remove that country....” Responding to the anchor’s question “Does that mean the annihilation of Israel?” he said, “Yes, of course.”
Prior to, but particularly since the October 7 attacks, individuals and groups claiming to advocate for an end to Israeli military action and policies violating Palestinian rights have incorporated the phrase “From the river to the sea” in online and offline statements and other materials which also attempt to justify violent terrorist acts against Israelis (see image sources here, here, and here). The inclusion of the phrase “From the river to the sea” alongside images evoking violence, including images representing groups with violent antisemitic ideologies like Hamas, such as the image of a paraglider which recalls perpetrators of the October 7 attacks, clarifies that the intention is to encourage or justify the commission of violence across the entirety of the State of Israel and against its inhabitants.
In other contexts, the phrase has been used in connection with words or imagery that clearly show that the “freedom” sought is from the presence of Jews. In one November 2022 example (here), a large sign placed at a U.S. university featured the phrase “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” written over a canvas made entirely of copies of an op-ed in the student newspaper entitled, “I am proud of my Jewish identity more than anyone can ever hate me for it.” Similarly, in April 2023, Barcelona’s largest synagogue was defaced with graffiti bearing the phrase (here). Several other similar incidents are described in the next section. In some contexts, the phrase is also used to convey rejection of Jews’ right to national self-determination in some part of their historic homeland. Some who chant or post this phrase, pair it with calls such as “Jews go back to Europe.” Such denials of the Jewish people’s historical connection to the land and the continuous presence of Jews in the region for thousands of years also ignore that Israel’s population includes descendants of many of the 800,000 Jews expelled from Muslim-majority countries in North Africa and the Middle East following Israel’s creation.
The above-mentioned examples go beyond criticizing Israel’s policies, its military actions, or other elements of the State or expressing a desire to see the Palestinian people achieve self-determination, none of which are antisemitic. Instead, the phrase is paired with accompanying images or texts that convey support for Hamas’ meaning of it or for an explicit anti-Jewish agenda.
III. Online and offline harms from the use of the phrase “From the river to the sea.”
As noted above, “From the river to the sea” can, when paired with certain key indicators, communicate support or advocacy for the violent elimination of the State of Israel as an instantiation of Jewish collective rights. In these contexts, the phrase often denigrates Jews, denies their equality and right to self-determination, conveys antisemitic stereotypes including all Israeli Jews are “colonizers” and labeling as racist all people who believe Jews have a legitimate right to reside in Israel, and encourages the exclusion of Jews from Israel or even their violent elimination. The majority of Jews around the world see Israel as an essential part of their Jewish identity, whether historically, culturally, and/or religiously. In fact, for American Jews, 80% of them report that Israel is important to what being Jewish means to them. International authorities have affirmed that denying Jews’ aspiration for self-determination as illegitimate or even racist is antisemitic:
• Secretary-General António Guterres recalled in 2018 that “attempts to delegitimize the right of Israel to exist, including calls for its destruction” is a contemporary manifestation of antisemitism.
• The U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism created by the White House concurs: “Jewish students and educators are targeted for derision and exclusion on college campuses, often because of their real or perceived views about the State of Israel. When Jews are targeted because of their beliefs or their identity or when Israel is singled out because of anti-Jewish hatred, that is antisemitism.”
• The EU Strategy on combating antisemitism states that “Israel-related antisemitism” is “the most common form of antisemitism encountered online by Jews in Europe today.”
• The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) noted in a 2021 recommendation that while it is legitimate to criticize the Israeli government, “denying Jews their right to a national homeland, holding the State of Israel to a different standard of behaviour than other states, or demonising the State of Israel and viewing it and its people as inherently evil or racist, may be regarded as antisemitic,” and “the different treatment of Jews and their national aspirations, and the singling out of Jewish people for applying other standards to them, constitute forms of antisemitism,” when opposition is expressed solely to a Jewish nation-state. It expressed concern about “the widespread view that attacks on Jewish persons or property could be considered as justifiable reactions to policies or actions of the Israeli government” and stressed that “condoning and indirect support for antisemitic racism needs to be strongly condemned and prevented.”
• In a January 2022 statement, a group of four independent UN human rights experts, remarking on incidents of violence, discrimination and harassment committed against Jews and Jewish sites by people targeting Jews as proxies for Israel because of their Jewish identity, particularly during and following armed hostilities in the Middle East in May 2021, said: “assertions that Zionism, the self-determination movement of the Jewish people, is an inherently racist ideology and a form of racial supremacy, suggesting that supporting Zionism is inherently equivalent to supporting racial discrimination...[are]...false [and] fuel resentment against Jews and normalise bias against Jewish communities worldwide.”
Antisemitic acts have been documented at record-high levels around the world in recent years. AJC's State of Antisemitism in America 2023 Report revealed that one in four (25%) American Jews reported being personally targeted by antisemitism in 2023 alone. Levels of antisemitism have increased since Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attacks against Israel, which the Oversight Board acknowledged in its January 2023 decision on Holocaust denial. In the weeks after October 7, compared to the prior period, monitors documented an increase in incidents of 400% in the U.S., 500% in Australia, 600% in the UK, 320% in Germany, and 960% in Brazil. The phrase “From the river to the sea” was expressed in some recent incidents, in addition to those mentioned above:
• On January 25, 2024, a man used the phrase “From the river to the sea” in a threatening voicemail to a synagogue in Massachusetts expressing an intent to kill Jews in retaliation for acts by Israeli forces in Gaza.
• On March 24, 2024 at a “Resistance 101” event at Columbia University, a speaker encouraged “armed resistance” against Israel, saying, “We have the right to return home, and we will get that right by any means necessary,” and added that Palestinians had the right to “every inch of Palestine, from the river to the sea,” including cities within Israel’s internationally recognized borders such as Akko and Jaffa.
• On March 26, 2024, a synagogue in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania was targeted by two women who spraypainted “Ceasefire now, end the occupation, free Palestine,” and “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” outside the congregation entrance.
Moreover, online content conveying support for the exclusion of or discrimination against Jews and encouraging the commission of violence against Jews is directly causing substantial harm to Jews. As noted in AJC's State of Antisemitism in America 2023 Report, Jews continue to regularly experience antisemitism online or on social media, with 62% of U.S. Jews reporting having experienced antisemitism online, either as a target or by seeing antisemitic content, in the past 12 months. Younger Jews were more likely to have experienced antisemitism this way: 67% of those 18-29 years old compared with 61% of those aged 30 or older, and 25% said these online incidents made them feel physically threatened (compared to 21% of those over age 30). Regular experiences with antisemitism are both creating an environment that is harassing and intimidating to Jews and impacting Jews’ ability to enjoy their rights. AJC also found that 46% of all Jewish respondents reported they had altered their behavior at least once in the past year due to fears of antisemitism: 30% avoided posting content online that would enable others to identify them as Jewish or reveal their views on Jewish issues; 26% avoided wearing or displaying things that might enable others to identify them as Jewish; and 26% avoided certain places, events, or situations due to concerns about their safety or comfort as Jews.
Meta should clearly prohibit use of the phrase “From the river to the sea,” when accompanied by other indicators that make it likely to contribute to the dangerous spread of antisemitism online and in real life.
IV. Meta has a human rights responsibility to take steps to limit the presence and visibility of some content containing the phrase “From the river to the sea” on its platforms.
Meta has accepted a responsibility, articulated in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), to engage in ongoing human rights due diligence to evolve its operations and policies (UNGPs, Principle 17(c) and 18(b)) and address negative human rights impacts arising from its operations (UNGPs 11, 13). Jews have the right to equality and non-discrimination, including on the basis of religion and race (Art. 2, para. 1, ICCPR; Art. 2, ICERD; Art. 2(2) of the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief). The UNGPs indicate that companies like Meta should take measures to prevent discrimination against Jews in access to their platforms for expression (Art. 19 ICCPR), and to protect against discrimination against Jews in areas including the right to life and physical integrity, the right to freedom of religion or belief, the right to participate in public life, and the right to participate in cultural life, as well as the right to health (Art. 12, ICESCR), particularly for children (Arts 2 and 6, CRC).
Meta has a responsibility to respect the right to freedom of expression (Article 19 ICCPR) but also a responsibility to prohibit advocacy of hatred that constitutes incitement to religious or racial discrimination, hostility, or violence (Article 20 ICCPR), as well as to prohibit other content amounting to hate speech in limited circumstances that adhere to the requirements of legality, legitimate aim, and necessity and proportionality as set out in ICCPR Article 19(3). Assessments of restrictions on hate speech by Meta will differ from assessments of restrictions that governments can impose, as unlike a government, Meta can only limit users’ access to its platforms, and cannot impose civil or criminal punishments. As affirmed by the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of expression, and as noted by the Oversight Board in Depiction of Zwarte Piet (2021-002-FB-UA), Armenians in Azerbaijan (2020-003-FB-UA), and Holocaust Denial (2023-22-IG-UA) companies must remove content from their platforms that constitutes incitement to discrimination or violence, but they may also remove hate speech that falls below this threshold, particularly where it raises concerns in terms of tolerance, civility, and respect for others (Rabat Plan of Action, para. 12, 20).
For the reasons set out above, Meta should prohibit content containing the phrase “From the river to the sea” on its platforms (unless it falls under one of the general exceptions under the Hate Speech Community Standard permitting content that is intended to condemn or raise awareness about hate speech and for newsworthy and very limited types of satirical content) in the following situations:
(1) When content using the phrase “from the river to the sea” appears alongside text, images, or symbols signaling violence, including of organizations that advocate for Israel’s violent elimination such as Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and their leaders, members, or insignia or other symbols associated with them; or
(2) When content using the phrase “From the river to the sea” appears alongside text, images, or symbols that convey a call, explicitly or implicitly, for discrimination against Jews, including advocacy for the exclusion of Jews (or “Zionists” as a proxy for Jews or Israelis) from social groups, academic institutions, professional settings, or even the territory of Israel itself.
This limited restriction would have the legitimate purpose of protecting Jewish individuals and communities from antisemitic violence, discrimination, and hostility. Such a limitation is also necessary and proportionate given the extremely high levels of antisemitic acts being recorded worldwide, which is causing severe harm at a societal and individual level. It is necessary to ensure that users of Meta’s products are not repeatedly exposed to antisemitic messages denigrating Jews, depicting their presence in the Middle East as illegitimate and harmful, calling for their exclusion or justifying the commission of violence against them, and making it more likely that such acts will be committed and tolerated around the world. It is also necessary to prevent Jewish users of Meta’s products from suffering harmful consequences resulting from being repeatedly exposed to such content. The general rules proposed above can be clearly articulated and enforced at scale, avoiding the need for Meta to make more complex assessments of intent, as doing so would raise significant enforcement challenges and give rise to significant uncertainty (Oversight Board, Depiction of Zwarte Piet, 2021-002-FB-UA).
In the limited situations we have set out above, less severe interventions than removal of such harmful content, such as labels, warning screens, or other measures to reduce dissemination, might be useful but would not provide the same protection. In this regard, in the 2022 Follow-up Action Plan to his 2019 report on antisemitism to the General Assembly, then-UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief advised: “Social media companies should ensure that their community guidelines clearly convey that all forms of antisemitic content ... are not permitted, and that these guidelines are transparent and easily accessible to users ... They should consult with representatives of Jewish communities regarding the contents of their guidelines in order to understand what content is harmful in different contexts.” Similarly, in a December 2023 statement, the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, the Special Adviser on Prevention of Genocide, and the High Representative for the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations (UNAOC), who is the UN Focal Point to monitor Antisemitism, expressed alarm that “expressions of religious hatred and incitement to violence are proliferating rapidly on social media,” and called on social media companies to “act decisively against hate speech and incitement to religious violence, discrimination and hostility online.”
V. Conclusion
Meta’s platforms should facilitate robust public discourse, including in support of the rights of Palestinians. However, particularly when levels of global antisemitism are unprecedented, Meta has a responsibility to intervene and protect Jewish and all users when online expression crosses the line into anti-Jewish hatred or calls to violence.
Here's how the distinguished British-Israeli (Jewish) historian Ilan Pappe responded when federal agents interrogating him on arrival at the Detroit airport asked how he responded to the slogan 'Palestine should be free from the river to the sea'?:
"I said that everywhere where there is a river and there is a sea and people living between them, they should be free, which was a bit ironical or comical, when one of them tried to show me his geographical knowledge, and he said, “So, what about Saudi Arabia?” So I corrected my phrase, and I said, “Well, anywhere where there are countries between two sources of water, people should be free,” which seemed to satisfy them at that particular moment."
It’s the land of Palestine before the colonial settlers.
There is no animosity or hatred intended with the saying From the River to the Sea. It is merely a cry for freedom and peace, not war or hatred when it comes to Palestinian Freedom. I struggle to see why it is ok for Israeli government representative's to speak those words, yet not people who want to see an end to the killings and want peace and freedom for all people.
Two issues 1. Free speech being the first and most important. 2. There are Palestinians living most places between the river and the sea as third class citizens with no rights. Why shouldn’t they be free? Most people don’t mean that Israel shouldn’t exist when using that phrase. They just want Palestinians to be free and have the same rights as Israelis.
Yes this needs to be allowed. It is a call for Palestinian freedom.
From Sea to Shining Sea. How is that any different. Policing our phrases aren’t going to keep anyone safe. People are free to type or comment at Black identifying people as the N word or racial slurs and hate filled phrases online on meta with no repercussion whatsoever. You can’t decide that a phrase that’s been used now for over 75 years is somehow implying something it never was because of fear. We are all afraid of something but meta is picking and choosing what to monitor and build policy around and that’s the definition of unfair and contrary to the first amendment of the constitution in the US.
From the rivet to the sea is originally an israeli slogan used by Likud. Banning it means going against Likud
Policy Advisory Opinion 2024-05-07
Regarding New Cases on Posts that Include “From the River to the Sea”
Comments Submitted by Tal-Or Cohen Montemayor on behalf of CyberWell Ltd. (CC)
**Attached as a PDF, please find the updated version with full footnote citations
Executive Summary
As the Oversight Board considers recommendations regarding Meta’s policies and practices when addressing content citing the phrase, “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be Free”, foremost in the deliberations must be consideration for the real-world harm that has been caused and continues to be perpetuated by the use of this term as a call for violence and vandalism against Jewish communities, their institutions, and monuments dedicated to preserving the memory of the Holocaust around the world. CyberWell recommends that, similar to Meta’s approach to the seemingly ‘innocuous’ term “Where we go one, we go all”, the use of “From the River to the Sea” to target and attack Jewish individuals and communities has met a threshold of real-world harm and risk and, as such, should be flagged and actioned as a sensitive term that causes violence until the current wave of the antisemitism against Jews, offline and online, subsides.
Introduction
As a nonprofit organization committed to eradicating online Jew-hatred through driving the enforcement and improvement of community guidelines and safety policies of digital platforms, it is important for CyberWell to provide guidance on this subject, as the phrase “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free” is currently frequently being used as a mobilization cry in various flashpoints of antisemitism and violence against Jews online and in their communities, on college campuses, and against Jewish institutions worldwide.
We further seek to offer solutions rooted in content moderation best practices that balance freedom of expression with Meta’s obligation to protect their users with adequate responses and protocol to prevent the spread of additional violence against Jews. As such, we refer to the actions taken by Meta against a similarly ‘innocuous’ term at scale on Facebook and Instagram, “Where we go one, we go all”, due to the risk of real-world harm, as a framework for sourcing recommended solutions on how to treat “From the River to the Sea”.
Antisemitism Expressed by “From the River to the Sea”
As Jews constitute a protected category on Meta platforms, and as CyberWell’s ongoing methodology focuses on identifying antisemitic content and trends on digital platforms, we first conduct an analysis on “From the River to the Sea” and whether it can hold antisemitic implications. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism is a consensus definition of anti-Jewish bias that is adopted formally by over 40 countries and over 1,000 universities, municipalities, and sports leagues, and CyberWell uses this definition when analyzing our data.
The implementation of the call to dissolve the State of Israel “From the River to the Sea”, effectively barring Jews from their right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland of modern-day Israel, would be consistent with the seventh example featured in the IHRA working definition.
However, since Meta has not adopted the IHRA working definition in full and the words of this phrase do not explicitly target a protected category of users on Meta’s platforms (i.e. Jews and Israelis), we recognize that it would be difficult to identify this phrase on its own as violating existing digital policy without additional context.
Two examples from the IHRA definition are more appropriate in this case, providing the necessary additional context on when use of this phrase would be a violation of Meta’s existing policies. These include the first example, “calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews”, and the eleventh example, “Holding Jews responsible for the actions of the State of Israel”.
Weaponizing this phrase, or any other phrase, and using it to harass, target, or commit violence against Jews, would be against Meta’s existing policies, and moreover, would be consistent with real world harms that we see occurring today such as violations of law, proliferation of hate crimes, and danger to public safety.
Real World Harm
During the current unprecedented surge in antisemitism worldwide following the violent October 7 attacks against Israeli civilians, this phrase is being used in just such a way. Synagogues from Philadelphia to Barcelona were vandalized with this phrase. “From the River to the Sea” was spray-painted on the site where the Palestinian terror group, Black September, massacred and took hostage 11 Israelis and a German police officer during the 1972 Munich Olympic games. This phrase was used as a rallying cry in multiple illegal college solidarity encampments when physically restricting, harassing, threatening, spitting on, and physically harming Jewish students, press, and members of the public. It was also chanted as eggs and fireworks were hurled during the opening of the new National Holocaust Museum in Amsterdam. The phrase was spay-painted on multiple university and college buildings, properties, and monuments that were sites of the encampments in the US and Europe, with the University of Amsterdam estimating damages of 1.5 million Euros that extended to municipality and public neighborhoods.
As record-numbers of violent antisemitic incidents against Jews continue to soar, including ‘revenge’ murders, kidnappings, and rapes of perceived Jewish people in the name of suffering in Gaza (see cases in UK and France ), it is safe to say that the burden of proof of ‘real world harm’ that would require additional content moderation restrictions around incendiary rallying cries meant for mobilization has been met.
Online Harm
Online antisemitism is cited in multiple surveys as the top form of Jew-hatred that effects Jewish people on a day-to-day basis, causing them fear for their physical safety, depression, lack of sleep, and even causing them to hide their Jewish identity online and offline. The number one social media platform cited by survey participants as where they most experience digital Jew-hatred was Facebook in the American Jewish Council’s State of Online Antisemitism survey in 2023.
While the Oversight Board attempts to offer important guidance on the use of this phrase by bringing content moderation cases for review, these cases do not address the way this phrase is weaponized on Meta’s platforms in the comment section. Aside from the experience of Jewish and Israeli users seeing this phrase calling for the destruction of their homeland normalized on their favorite social media apps, the weaponization of this phrase, alongside the use of the Palestinian flag, the inverted red triangle (violent Hamas propaganda symbol signaling targets for murder), and many pro-Palestinian hashtags that do not inherently violate community standards, are being used to promote online bullying and harassment by flooding the comments section of non-political Jewish and Israeli accounts. This harassment continues with zero systematic intervention on the part of Meta.
Learning from Precedent
In 2019-2020 after the QAnon conspiracy theory became popular online, ‘jumping’ from darker messaging platforms like 4chan to larger mainstream social media platforms via YouTube, such as Facebook, Instagram, and X, companies, including Meta, began taking strong systematic content moderation actions against QAnon-related content and groups, including seemingly ‘innocuous’ and non-violating content like the slogan, “Where we go one, we go all,” and its affiliated hashtag #WWG1WGA, which was often touted by QAnon believers.
Making initial moves against QAnon and militarized Antifa content in August 2020, which was later expanded and formalized to include a new category called militarized social movements, Meta’s removal actions resulted in a total removal of 127,000 Facebook accounts, 8,400 Facebook pages, 32,800 Facebook groups, 47,700 Instagram accounts, and over 1,000 Facebook events between August 2020-October 2022. Meta also targeted affiliated hashtags across both Facebook and Instagram for enhanced moderation.
In an effort to suggest a framework as to how “From the river to the sea” and other seemingly non-violative content against Israelis should be treated given the unprecedented amount of damage and real world harm that has been caused to Jewish communities, Israeli communities, public institutions, places of worship, and Holocaust memorial sites, CyberWell referred to Meta’s initial statement, “How we address movements and organizations tied to violence,” published on August 19, 2020 (hereinafter: Militarized Groups Approach), and asks the Oversight Board to suggest the same in this case.
The Militarized Groups Approach is meant to be applied to individuals who “Have celebrated violent acts, [and] individual followers with patterns of violent behavior.” This systematic approach was not only applied to the individuals affiliated with these groups, but also to identifiable phrases and hashtags, even when they did not inherently violate community standards.
There is ample evidence to suggest that the current anti-Israel movement is being actively supported by radical militant groups, who are using pro-Palestinian symbols and slogans to perpetuate violence. During the clearing of Columbia University’s solidarity encampment, over half of the arrests made by the NYPD were individuals who were not students or faculty, with law enforcement reporting that many of them were part of known militant activist groups. In Portland, only six of the thirty arrests made at the Portland State University encampment were students. An Antifa affiliated group known as Rachel Corrie’s Ghost Brigade participated in the PSU encampment, encouraged students to throw fireworks at ‘Zionist settlers’, and burned 15 police cars.
The Militarized Groups Approach further imposes restrictions to limit the spread of content from Facebook Pages, Groups, and Instagram accounts where there are discussions of potential violence including the use of veiled language and symbols particular to the movement to do so.
Therefore, CyberWell suggests the following content moderation measures be applied from the Militarized Groups Approach to the phrase “From the River to the Sea” due to real-world harm being committed under this slogan.
• Reduce ranking in news feed
• Reduce in search
• Reviewing related hashtags that are sparking or mobilizing real world harm
• Prohibit use of ads, fundraisers, commerce surfaces and monetization tools when using this phrase
Appendix of Online Antisemitism Examples Featuring “From the River to the Sea”
IHRA Type 1
1. https://www.facebook.com/rafiq.ibrahim.9849/posts/pfbid021Lgxe4WrG2qW2yJoKj9iKPZukzspVh85442CqrPXEeyCuESftP3UjrtiwsGryF2Ul
2. https://www.facebook.com/100081437006283/videos/2078717669155119/
3. https://www.facebook.com/hani.ayyash.16/posts/pfbid07yKzuqx9Zu8gw3fYxtEcQdx3qvc61ZyYEKCxWMAJ1FWZJNdp82zzvNsVZFqCmSqWl
IHRA Type 11
1. https://www.facebook.com/rahima.ema/posts/pfbid0p7oBgveyLP7cYyA6RyKBtHaBetSvtxTznCShX67qvueSCbcH1DTLifEsgN1Pzmzil
2. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid035axTxcuNTYNYEd5yAhERLSJJ5bDB223N2jmtW55st2XpFUStLj8i7Grj5wtxoSwSl&id=100090551333293
3. https://www.facebook.com/1169346037/posts/10229418315500206
4. https://www.facebook.com/amit.ruparelia.5/posts/pfbid0msQC4B9AhgqpLaFCq3v11wbjwX9futkm6W68tMrat3rzVjG3Z21wXgSiZ7gzQup9l
Antisemitic comment on a post with the slogan “From the River to the Sea”
1. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid0YjDhysjEtjj8duna8EMDD8hayX6vgpYgMczFH2Pf6Jj3BdfeW8YRsYFJ311iCsJLl&id=100072649719754&comment_id=943546897776831