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
From the river to the sea is a call for the violent destruction of Israel and the creation of a Muslim state of Palestine in its place. The only way to achieve such a state would be to expel or kill most or all of the Jewish inhabitants of Israel. Thus, it falls squarely within the UN’s definition of genocide. The US Congress has recognized this. It is an anodyne formulation of the phrase “death to Israel.”
"From the river to the sea" is not antisemitic, and is not hate speech.
"From the river to the sea" is antisemitic
The phrase “from the river to the sea” is NOT hate speech. It is used to celebrate Palestinian identity, not unlike how phrases like “from sea to shining sea” are used to celebrate American identity. Palestinians deserve dignity and self-determination, and it should not be controversial to say this.
"from the river to the sea" is not antisemitic or hate speech.
It calls for freedom from an apartheid system, a political complaint. It calls for the end of a harmful oppressive system in non violent ways and a return of displaced refugees. Any escalation of violence is a projection by a violent person.
Keep the posts up!
While the phrase “from the river to the sea” may be uncomfortable for some Jews, that isn’t the same as it being hate speech. It’s true that its use goes back to the Mufti of Jerusalem in the 1920s and 30s, Amin al-Husseini, who later attempted to get Adolf Hitler’s help forming an independent Palestine. But it’s also true that the modern Israeli Likud party has used it to mean that Israel has the right to obliterate Gaza and the West Bank, which is both more recent and more explicitly genocidal than the early 20th century usage.
Again, it can be an uncomfortable phrase (both directions), but the 2024 protests that use it do not mean it in either of those ways. Protestors—many of whom are Jewish themselves—chant it to mean that everywhere in the land of Israel/Palestine should be safe for people, including Palestinians. There should be nowhere that being Palestinian means being interrogated at gunpoint, or assaulted by people trying to drive you off your land and out of your home. Anyone who thinks such a vision means all Jews would have to be eradicated from the region must truly have a low opinion of Jews!
Palestinians are not saying they want to kill Jews. Just that they want Jews not to kill them. And this isn’t coming from news reports—I’m referring here to conversations I’ve had in person with real people at protests over the last six months. The protests have brought together all kinds of people all united in the same cause, even when we are from different backgrounds and may have started out feeling uncomfortable together. Free speech is not always comfortable.
The phrase ‘from the river to the sea’ is not hate speech and so should not be censored.
“from the river to the sea” is a call for the genocide of the people who currently live in Israel from The River to the Sea.
That land is already occupied, so calling for the “river to the sea” to be free is a call for it to be free of the people who live there.
From the river to the sea is not antisemitic, nor is it hate speech. People who say this are trying to shift the conversation away from condemnation of the Israeli apartheid state and the merciless, shameful genocide of the Palestinian people by the far-right Israeli government, and onto a semantic strawman. I implore Facebook and people of good sense to recognize this cynical distraction tactic for what it is and refocus on the horrifying mass murder of Palestinians rather than squabbling over a phrase used to communicate the Palestinians' wish for peace and liberation.
From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is an antisemitic slogan commonly featured in anti-Israel campaigns and chanted at demonstrations.
This rallying cry has long been used by anti-Israel voices, including supporters of terrorist organizations such as Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), the United States State Department designated foreign terrorist organization on 8 October 1997.
(https://www.dni.gov/nctc/ftos/pflp_fto.html....)
PFLP seeks Israel’s destruction through violent means. It is fundamentally a call for a Palestinian state extending from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, territory that includes the State of Israel, which would mean the dismantling of the Jewish state. It is an antisemitic charge denying the Jewish right to self-determination, including through the removal of Jews from their ancestral homeland.
Usage of this phrase has the effect of making members of the Jewish and pro-Israel community feel unsafe and ostracized. It is important to note that demanding justice for Palestinians, or calling for a Palestinian state, should not mean, as this hateful phrase posits, denying the right of the State of Israel to exist.
That phrase is a clear reference to eliminating the Jewish people. It’s abhorrent, hate speech and should not be tolerated.
Hello! I want to surge the Board not to consider “from the river to the sea” as hate speech. I’m a Jewish American and I know how important calls for freedom and one’s love of their land is. “From sea to shining sea” would never be considered as hateful or dangerous, even though colonizers in the US have enacted horrific violent acts of hateful destruction against native peoples in order to establish their patriotic claim to the sea to shining sea. A call for freedom and liberation in one’s homeland is not a call for violence against others, and I believe that while “from the river to the sea” has been used in occasion by antisemites as a call for violence, they are in the minuscule minority and in general the phrase is a call for peace and freedom.
This makes no sense. From the river to the sea has nothing to do with hate or dangerous individuals. Meta you are clearly being biased if you think support for Israel's war amd attacks are NOT hateful , but simply saying From the River to the Sea in solidarity with Palestinians is. If you make this move your platforms will lose more support 💯
As you are aware, since the horrific terrorist attack on Israel, on Oct 7th, by the Islamist militant faction Hamas, the rise of antisemitism has increased almost 500% in on our country, and our university campuses have greatly contributed.
Pro-Palestinian Protestors chant “From the river to the sea,” as lots as possible.
“From the river to the sea,” calls for the extermination of the Jewish people. This definition was adopted and documented by Hamas in its 2017 charter. Using this phrase needs to be stopped immediately.
No one should ever be subjected to the call for their extermination. We would NEVER tolerate calls to eliminate members of the LGBTQ, Hispanic or Black communities, and Jews deserve the same protection.
Dear Oversight Board,
The phrase "from the river to the sea" is not antisemitic, nor is it hate speech. This Al Jazeera article explains more: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/2/from-the-river-to-the-sea-what-does-the-palestinian-slogan-really-mean
Please do not limit free speech which is not hate speech.
I am curious how "From the River to the Sea" can keep getting flagged as "antisemitic". Israelis have been using a very similar version themselves, for a long time.
'The 1977 election manifesto of the right-wing Israeli Likud party said: "Between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty."' - Source: Wikipedia
The amount of censorship on Meta regarding anything related to Palestine is borderline delusional. I myself have lost an account on Instagram for merely posting and reposting news directly from Palestine and Gaza. Meta refuses to give me @allegedlydawntjeshannon back, which was taken down after reports for "nudity".
When posts are not being removed, tampered with, or shadowbanned, it's entire accounts that are disappearing for posting news about Palestine.
“ From the river to the sea” is a call for the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Jews from the state of Israel. It is hate speech and should not be tolerated.
https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/slogan-river-sea-palestine-will-be-free
“From the river to the sea” is (part of a) phrase that literally refers to the idea/political aim to abolish the State of Israel, that since 1948 is fully legitimated in international law as a state founded and predominantly inhabited by Jewish people, though not excluding others. Israel was then, in 1948, the result of the UN -sponsored partition decision that recognized a Jewish part and a Palestinian-Arab part of the British mandate territory (which originally was assigned in the San Remo Accords of 1920 and in the 1922 Mandate document, to the Jews. The local Arabs in 1947( supported by the Arab states) rejected the UN decision for partition and started a war of annihilation on the Jewish population. The Jews in the area had accepted the partition plan. The Jews won this ‘war of independence and self-defence; the Arabs lost, but occupied a big part (the ‘West Bank’) of the mandate area. They did not recognize the Jews’ right to a state - in which they were supported by countless Arab states and a large number of other countries.
The entire sentence of the above absurd slogan, in countless pro-‘Palestinian’ and pro-HaFrom the river to the sea violence and terror. ‘Free’ here means: ‘no Israel’, and ‘free from Israelis/Jews’. No amount of casuistry or apologetics can refute this fact, and in all demonstrations, e.g., on US university campuses, the underlying Jew-hatred is evident – going beyond hatred of the Israeli government.
Hence the phrase is NOT at all to “advocate for the dignity and human rights of Palestinians” (who live in other areas, including the contested or for some ’occupied’ territories that were before 1948 part of the Mandate territory of Palestine (from 1917 to 1947). There neither was ever a ‘Palestinian(Arab) state) in the area. The Jews live in the area since the 10th century BCE, the Arabs came only in the 9th century CE, as part of larger Muslim empires. Before 1948, the Jews living in Mandate Palestine were also called Palestinians (witness e.g., the ‘Palestine Post’, a Jewish newspaper, and the ‘Palestine Philharmonic’, a Jewish orchestra. Also there were Palestinian sports associations: in majority Jewish). ‘Palestine’ was then (since 1917) the new but temporary British political-administrative unit (mandate). Before 1917, there was never a political unit of than name, let alone an Arab one.
The slogan in its entirely – ‘From the river to the sea’ - has clear genocidal implications is echoing Hamas’s Charter, which calls for the violent removal of all Jews from Israel, that they - mistakenly and deviously - label as ‘Palestine’.
A related argument is that in most pro-‘Palestine’ or ‘pro-Hamas’ demonstrations – more often than not violent and destructive, e.g., on US and European university campuses - the slogan is accompanied not only by other ‘anti-Zionist’ statements and shouts, but also by anti-Jewish cries and rampant physical-verbal threats and intimidation of Jewish students, professors and counter-protesters.
So the so-called pro-Palestinian, pro-Gaza demonstrations always shade into Jew-hatred. The slogan is absolutely unacceptable because of its clear genocidal intention and implications. Multiple video-clip evidence could be cited here.
Since the phrase "From the river to the sea" is a call for elimination of Jewish people from the entire region, I'm unsure how you could think it is anything OTHER than hate speech.
The use of the phrase “From the River to the Sea” has a long history of use by Palestinian people to call for justice in their long fight against apartheid and ethnic cleansing. To outcry against such horrors does not equate to terrorism, nor antisemitism. The involvement of Jewish people in the Pro-Palestine movement is known and cherished, and the call for justice against human rights and international law violations is championed among many Jewish individuals and communities. Israel does not speak for every Jewish person, and to equate criticisms of Israel to antisemitism will reduce the ability to combat the very real, violent, and unacceptable antisemitism that exists in the world.
To restrict the use of this phrase is to justify the silencing and marginalization of a group of people whose suffering is insurmountable. It sets a dangerous precedent to restrict public dissent and calls for justice from other marginalized groups.
Meta’s resources would be much better spent removing actual hate speech and discrimination present on its platforms, than to silence a group of people who are standing for justice and their values.