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
To me river to the sea means freedom for all the people in this troubled land. The oppressors are just as much imprisoned as the oppressed. As it’s said in therapy, conflict breeds intimacy. Think deeply on that. Two persons involved in conflict are deeply involved with each other.
I see a land where no one has to fight! Where the people evolve out of their hatreds, discriminations, biases, and prejudices. This is not the natural way of the human being, it is taught from a manipulative society. After all it is the birthplace of the three major religions. The problem arose when one religion wanted all the land for itself. Why would this religion think this is okay? This must be deeply evaluated and processed.
To me saying from the river to the sea is a beautiful euphemism of all people living peacefully and in harmony. After all is this not the basic tenets of these three major religions.
The fact that “from the river to the sea” has been targeted and put down as a “call for genocide” when the ACTUAL GENOCIDE in Gaza has yet to be stopped, is only further proof that this dystopian society values profits over the lives of human beings. Furthermore it is anti-Semitic to conflate the actions of an inhuman apartheid state with 2000+ significant years of Judaism. The horrors we have seen coming out of Gaza are reminiscent of all the genocides we learn about in our history classes in middle and high school. Why are we disregarding history when it’s staring us right in the face?
For me 'From the River to the Sea' means that all human beings, regardless of ethnicity, skin colour or religion, will live as equals in dignity and freedom. No one group will have domination over another. No one group will be superior to another. I cannot think of a more humanitarian and beautiful aspiration.
Free speech cannot be cherry picked based on the personal preferences and religious/political leanings of the leadership within a company. I have seen countless videos on Meta platforms where pro-zionist pages and profiles have called for death to innocent Palestinian children, called for student protestors to be raped, called for the dehumanization of an entire group of people. If we begin cherrypicking who can spew this nasty rhetoric based on Meta's sociopolitical leanings and its confirmation bias, the platform will descend into and begin to promote a culture of pure cognitive dissonance, where opposing ideas cannot even be discussed or presented without censorship. This is a dangerous move, as we begin to see fascism, censorship, and media manipulation on the rise, while watching tens of thousands of children being maimed, dismembered, blown up before our own eyes. Meta, please stay out of the free speech debate, stop trying to hide the reporting of world events by those who are reporting on the ground or sharing their tortuous lived experience, and instead focus on providing services for your client base. Despite what Citizens United claims, that corporations are absolutely not people. Let the people speak and stay out of it. Meta, please just do your job, which is to create and maintain a functional platform. If you really want to be involved on this debate, advocate for the children, to stop blowing up your future clientele.
I am totally opposed to banning "From the River to the Sea" from Facebook.
There is a common misunderstanding of the above phrase. The phrase refers to all the people who live in the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, historical Palestine.
To ban "From the River to the Sea" would leave out the historical context from which this phrase arose.
It refers to the historical aspiration of Palestinians to be free to move around in a single state encompassing all of historic Palestine, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. Censoring this phrase would be seen as the continuation of the project of colonization by colonizers who originated in the West.
The meaning of the phrase "From the River to the Sea" depends on the context in which it is used. While pro Israeli factions claim it is to advocate for violence, the Likud party has used it to express a desire for an exclusionary state for Jews only. Peace loving Jews and Palestinians desire is for a just and equitable solution to the conflict, and thats what this phrase represents. Censorship would prevent people from using the phrase in its intended context.
To ban "From the River to the Sea" from Facebook would contribute to the misunderstanding of this phrase. It is important to be able to have discussions on Facebook. The act of banning this phrase would contribute to the idea this phrase is dangerous to the Israeli people, while it is not looking at the historical context.
Ongoing discussion would allow exchanges of ideas of what it could become for both peoples.
From the Toilet to the Sea should be allowed on Facebook.
The phrase "From the River to the Sea" underscores the Palestinian aspiration for self-determination, freedom from occupation, and the establishment of a sovereign state. It reflects a longstanding sentiment rooted in historical injustices and the decades-long search for basic rights, including political and civil rights.
The slogan symbolizes the hope for an end to displacement and the establishment of a Palestinian state. Advocacy using this slogan often centers on universal human rights principles, emphasizing equality, justice, and the end of systemic oppression. It seeks to draw attention to the plight of Palestinians who have faced decades of displacement, occupation, and discrimination, urging the global community to recognize and address these ongoing issues.
The slogan is fundamentally about dismantling the structures of occupation and achieving justice, rather than inciting harm.
Everyone should be free to say from the river to the sea. As a colonized people, there is no reason Palestinians should be denied liberation and dignity for their people
The words “from the river to the sea” clearly reference the genocide of Jews in Israel. These words do not support Palestinians in any way. If they came true, the Palestinians would be in no better situation than they are today, and probably worse off because Israel wouldn’t exist to give them free water, food and electricity.
The control attempt by META to stop the use of From The River To The Sea is war propaganda to silence a call for the freeing of Palestinian people in a country that is causing a genocide. This is manipulation and gaslighting to people who stand for human rights!!! If META allows a genocidal government control what countries that stand for free speech can say, then you are complicit in the genocide and ethnic cleansing. The bottom dollar is more important to META than human lives and that makes you disgusting and vile humans. Every single one of you. You are complicit.
Meta should not ban posts containing the slogan "from the river to the sea."
While some people allege that the slogan is genocidal and anti-Jewish in nature, the intended meaning of the slogan is not that at all. At most it can be construed as anti-Israel, but Israel is not synonymous with the Jewish people.
People who dislike the slogan interpret it as a call to murder all 7 million citizens of Israel to make way for a Palestinian state. But this is absurd, as absolutely no one outside of the most fringe extreme (of which any movement will contain, including the pro-Israel side) means this. Many Muslims even understand the slogan to call for a two state solution.
And while there are those who advocate the abolition of Israel, this is not necessarily a call to genocide, just as the call to abolish the Confederate States of America did not mean a call to murder all citizens of the American south, or a call to end Nazi Germany a call to murder all German people. It is important and necessary to distinguish the people of a nation from their government, as to not do so is what leads to hatred of ordinary people. If this distinction between Israel and Israelis and Jewish people cannot be made, then calls to "free Palestine from Hamas" or to "End Hamas" should also be understood as calls to end the Palestinian people living in Gaza, as they live under Hamas governance. Of course those calling for a ban on the "from the river to the sea" slogan would never tolerate such an equivalence.
A ban on "from the river to the sea," therefore, does not serve the purposes of civility or countering hatred, but is in reality an attempt to silence the pro-Palestinian movement. Meta would be making a serious mistake in going forward with the ban, as it would undermine Meta's credibility for the important work of content moderation.
While some have come to think of "from the river to the sea" as arguing for the slaughter of Israelis, this is actually a phrase used often by Israelis to declare their dominance over Palestinian territory. Understanding this phrase in the context of Israeli apartheid, it seems like a relatively unambiguous call for the liberation of Palestinians from their conditions of apartheid.
I am a white non-Jew, non-Arab girl. I have many Palestinian and Jewish friends and I come to you very disturbed by this proposal. Very. Disturbed. If the decision to label the statement “from the river to the sea” is taken in the best of faith, with no malice, then it is a complete misunderstanding towards the meaning of the phrase. It promotes the “Right to Return,” a humanitarian law that guarantees refugees a right to return to the land they fled. But Meta doesn’t profit when you care about upholding the principles of humanitarian international law. If, and what I feel like is more likely, this phrase has been labeled as such due to Meta’s political and economic ties to the apartheid state of “Israel” (in quotes to emphasize my personal repulsion towards calling that land as such), then you are all perpetuating fascism. “Israel” is a country. Countries do not have the right to exist. People have the right to exist and this makeshift state has murdered over 30,000 in the last 8 months. You know this. Your platform has shared (as well as censored) the live-streamed genocide of a people. Nowhere in the phrase “from the river to the sea” does it say to expel Jews from the land. If you actually listened to Palestinians and believed them, you'd see the absurdity of your censorship. But your profit motives don’t align with justice or human life. If you actually listened to Jews who see Zionism as antithetical to the identity of Judaism, that it directly goes against their faith, you’d realize that this is not an issue on whether Jews feel safe on your platform. “Israel” is unsafe for Jews. Palestinians are semites and many if not most Jews living in “Israel” are of European descent and therefore not Semitic. The Torah explicitly states that Jews shall not concentrate, they should be spread throughout the world. A Jewish state is anti-Jewish in accordance with the scripture. Many “Israelis” are not religious, why do they get to speak on the entirety of Jews? And this company doesn’t actually care about keeping Jews safe because I have 0% hope you’re going to strike this down. You’re gonna pass it through because you exist to uphold wealth and fascism. You’re puppets with purse strings. I would love if you could prove me wrong.
Every Palestinian deserves to live in their native land without being ruled over or ruling over others. To grow their sacred olive trees and enjoy the sea and be free.
The phrase "from the river to the sea" is NOT hate speech. The phrase refers to the entire region of historical Palestine, which has been the home of Jews, Palestinians, and others for centuries. It is a geographical reference, and does not refer to any particular ethnic group.
In recent years there has been an effort by Zionists to create an country for Jews exclusively in this region. They use the phrase "from the river to the sea" to refer to where they want this Jews-only country to be. Palestinians would prefer to be able to live in their historical homeland. The majority would like to see a multi-ethnic democracy in the region - including Jews if they were willing to live in peace. Palestinians also use the phrase to refer to the land where this would happen.
The U.S. government is backing the so-called 2-State Solution, with separate areas, one for Jews, and the other for everyone else. The phrase "from the river to the sea" speaks against this idea. So those who use it (again, both Palestinians and Jewish Zionists) are speaking in opposition to that policy. I support the right of anyone to speak in opposition to my government, and so should you. It is vitally important for us to support our precious right of free speech.
To sum up, this has nothing to do with hate speech. It has everything to do with freedom of speech.
Public Comment by Bundesverband RIAS on the Cases 2024-004-FB-UA, 2024-005-FB-UA, 2024-006-FB-UA, Posts That Include „From the River to the Sea“, by the Oversight Board
"From the river to the sea" as a short form of the slogan "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" is to be considered antisemitic and should be removed according to the Facebook community standards for hate speech.(1)
The Bundesverband RIAS (Federal Association of Departments for Research and Information on Antisemitism) is the umbrella organisation for the civil society reporting offices for antisemitic incidents in Germany. The RIAS reporting offices are the first point of contact for those affected by antisemitism in Germany.
Since its foundation in October 2018, the Bundesverband RIAS has built up a dense reporting network for antisemitic incidents in Germany. It pursues the goal of a uniform documentation of antisemitic incidents in Germany based on the IHRA working definition of antisemitism. Based on the categories and working methods of the Community Security Trust (CST), the Bundesverband RIAS has developed a database-based recording of antisemitic incidents, that allows for a nationwide comparability.
The Bundesverband RIAS works closely with the Central Council of Jews in Germany and other Jewish organisations as well as the German State Commissioners for Combating Antisemitism. Furthermore, Bundesverband RIAS coordinates the European Network on Monitoring Antisemitism (ENMA). ENMA was established in 2023 and consists of European Jewish and non-Jewish civil society organisations from various European countries.
In 2023 RIAS documented 190 antisemitic incidents in which "From the river to the sea" was said, written or referenced. While RIAS also documents the mere chanting of the slogan as an antisemitic incident, most of these incidents were also accompanied by other antisemitic or violence-inciting statements. For example, in the first half of the year, posters were documented in Berlin calling for an Intifada "from the river to the sea". Intifada as a term stands for resistance against oppressors, in the Palestinian-Israeli context historically expressed as terror and violence against Israelis, especially in the Second Intifada. So when an Intifada from the river to the sea is called for, this is clearly to be understood as a call for violence, additionally emphasized by the imagery of the posters: above the slogan, among other things, pictures of masked people with slingshots could be seen. In Stuttgart on October 9, 2023, the slogan was chanted alongside the antisemitic, Islamist slogan "Khaibar, khaibar ya yahud ". In English, the slogan reads in full: "Khaibar, Khaibar, O Jews, remember Khaibar, the army of Muhammad returns." The slogan is an affirmative reference to a campaign by the Prophet Muhammad against an oasis populated by Jews in the year 628, which ended with the conquest of the area and – according to some sources – a massacre of part of the Jewish population. It can be interpreted as a religiously legitimized call for violence against Jews. 148 of the 190 incidents were documented after October 7, so after the massacres and attacks on Israel by the Islamist Hamas and other terrorist organizations. The slogan therefore became even more popular after October 7.
In 2017, the Islamist terrorist organization Hamas published a policy document in which they explicitly adopted the slogan as their own. In it, they define the entire area from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea as the “integral territorial unit” of Palestine (Article 2). The founding of the state of Israel and its existence is rejected in any form (Article 18 & 19). In Article 20, they make it clear that for them there is no alternative to the "full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea". (2) It becomes clear here that the slogan implies the abolition of Israel. It is antisemitic to call for the liberation of Palestine if it means the abolition of Israel and thus the negation of the right of Jews to self-determination. It is also a call for violence against Jews who want to live in a Jewish state. This follows from the historical context of Hamas' actions.
Since 7 October 2023 and the massacres and attacks by Hamas and other terrorist organizations on Israel, a genocidal implication of the slogan has also become apparent. Actors who refer positively to the slogan "From the river to the sea" are thus legitimizing Hamas' antisemitic terror. On October 7 itself, a small group at Berlin Central Station shouted the slogan "From the River to the Sea – Palestine will be free" and openly rejoiced at videos of the atrocities that they played on a cell phone.
A peaceful interpretation of the slogan is no longer possible after October 7. An exception would be demands following the first part of the slogan, which specifically call for equal rights, such as in "From the river to the sea, we demand equality". Without such additions, a non-violent interpretation is unrealistic. Jews must assume that it means approval of the genocidal violence against them.
The Bundesverband RIAS is convinced that the slogan “From the river to the sea” violates the Facebook Community Standards with regard to:
“Content attacking concepts, institutions, ideas, practices or beliefs associated with protected characteristics, which are likely to contribute to imminent physical harm, intimidation or discrimination against the people associated with that protected characteristic. Facebook looks at a range of signs to determine whether there is a threat of harm in the content. These include, but are not limited to: content that could incite imminent violence or intimidation; whether there is a period of heightened tension such as an election or ongoing conflict; and whether there is a recent history of violence against the targeted protected group.”
Given that 148 of the reported 190 incidents with “From the river to sea” in 2023 have been reported after the antisemitic massacre of Hamas on Israeli civilians for their assumed Israeli origin we conclude that the use of the slogan, which has been adopted by the terror group responsible for the atrocities, is both inspired by the violence committed on 7 October 2023 and is likely to contribute to imminent physical harm against Jews or people of Israeli origin.
We are therefore urging the Oversight Board and Meta to strengthen the perspective of those affected by antisemiitism and Israel-hatred and to remove posts with the slogan "From the river to the sea" in the future.
We would also like to draw your attention to a statement from the Berlin public prosecutor's office. The public prosecutor's office has provided it to us for this public comment:
“The slogan 'From the river to the sea' (in German or other languages)" is as of now included in the prohibition orders issued by the Federal Ministry of the Interior on November 2, 2023 regarding Hamas and Samidoun. In the opinion of the Berlin public prosecutor's office, the utterance of this sentence is therefore generally punishable under Sections 86a (1) and 86 (2) StGB (criminal code) because Hamas is included in the so-called "EU terror list" (Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1505 of 20.07.2023, OJ L 184/1 – see II.9). Criminal liability pursuant to Section 20 para. 1 sentence 1 no. 5 VereinsG (Law on Associations) is also likely to apply on a regular basis. If the slogans are used in assembly situations in connection with Hamas' terrorist attack on Israel – in particular with its justification – the initial suspicion of condoning criminal acts pursuant to Section 140 StGB (rewarding and condoning criminal acts) and Section 130 para. 5 StGB (incitement of the people) should also regularly be considered, as the pogrom-like attacks on the Israeli population express an essentially eliminatory antisemitism, the condoning of which is also directed against Jews living in Germany.”
(1) https://transparency.meta.com/policies/community-standards/hate-speech/
(2) https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/hamas-2017-document-full
Origin: First of all,
The origin of this phrase lies in various Palestinian organizations, especially PLO, to particularly mention the clear intention of establishing a single Palestinian state, rejecting the two state partition plan of the UN, obviously by erasing Israel.
Then, according to the terrorist organization Hamas's charter, they clearly mentioned that their goal is to liberate Palestine from the river to the sea. (Similar declaration from the PFLP)
Just to add, this slogan was also used by many Jewish extremists to state their intention of establishing the state of Israel destroying the British mandate, and it was never welcomed, neither it is welcomed by anyone till date.
Implications:
It is not an assumption that the only way to establish a Palestinian state is erasing Israel, but rather, it's the stated goal of many terrorist organizations like Hamas in their charters/ memorandums. And what else does it mean by erasing Israel than committing genocide?
These are all not only theoretical implications but also practically pursued as well. During the first and second intifada, in the name of "liberating Palestine from the river to the sea," the terrorists didn't leave any measures unused. And then October 7th happened.
These are not only hateful speech but also violent consequences which is directly linked to and correlated to that slogan.
In whatever context you put in, except for directly and clearly opposing, this slogan is genocidal. It must not be allowed in any social media in order to keep the dream of completely annihilating a nation alive. Asking for freedom for a nation never should mean to annihilate another nation.
What other CONTEXT does Meta want to have to determine this is just another genocidal slogan, as the intifadah (violent uprising), or khaybar khaybar (the massacre of khaybar by Muhammad mentioned in hadith)!!!
ההתנגדות הנחרצת שלי מהמשפט האנטישמי לעיל כדלהלן
מעבר לעובדה הבסיסית שבין הירדן לים חיים לאומים שונים, בני דתות שונות, בני אדם מגזעים שונים. כיצד ניתן לתמוך בלאום אתני אחד שישלוט על כל השטח?
מדינת ישראל עוד טרם הקמתה, בנובמבר 47׳ אישרה וקיבלה בשמחה אדירה את החלטת האום המכירה במדינת ישראל על פי תוכנית החלוקה. המחוייבות הישראלית והיהודית לאורך הדורות להשיג שלום בר קיימא המבוסס על רעיון זה לא ידעה נחת. מהסכמים עם מנהיגים מקומיים, הסכמי אוסלו ב95, ההתנתקות ב05, ועוד ועוד הסכמים ונסיונות להשיג את מטרת השלום. הצעות שכולן נדחו על ידי הפלסטינים, מערפאת לאבו מאזן, רג׳וב או דאחלאן, כולם סירבו לכל הצעה וחזרו לעודד ולתמוך בטרור.
המשפט מן הירדן לים מסוכן לרעיונות העומדים בבסיס התפיסה הדמוקרטית, עקרונות כמו קבלת האחר, שוויון, צדק, הכלה, סובלנות.
אל לנו להתבלבל! הרעיון שעומד בבסיס המשפט הזה לא מותיר מקום לספק. מדובר בקריאה ברורה להשמדה אתנית (נוספת לצערנו) ללאום שסבל מההתנכלויות הגרועות ביותר באנושות.
אין ספק שאין מקום להתבטאות כאלה בפלטפורמה שמייצגת כל כך הרבה מהערכים הדמוקרטים ומשפיע על השיח בכל רחבי העולם.
אסור לנרמל רעיונות כאלה, כי ברגע שנעשה זאת - הן נבגוד בערכים עליהם שאפנו להגן, והן נוביל את עצמנו, העולם המערבי, למחוזות רעים מאוד שזכורים לרבים משנות ה40 של המאה הקודמת.
The idea that "from the river to the sea" is anti-Jewish is quite ridiculous. The phrase originated in the 1930s and was directed at the British who controlled the Palestinians and often subjugated them cruelly.
The Palestinians wanted to be free from British oppression from the river to the sea, almost two decades before Israel ever existed.
The Palestinians want to be free to control their own lives and enjoy self determination, and not be dominated by the Ottomans, the British or the Israelis. Is that really not understandable?