Meta has said it will expand its hate speech policy to cover more uses of the word “Zionist” when applied to Jews or Israelis on its platform.

We will now remove messages targeting ‘Zionists’ in several areas where our investigation has shown that the term tends to be used to refer to Jews and Israelis, with dehumanising comparisons, calls to harm, or denials of existence," the company said in a press release on Tuesday.

In December, Human Rights Watch said that Meta was guilty of “systemic censorship of Palestine content” during Israel’s war on Gaza.

  • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldBannedOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 years ago

    Conflating Jews and Zionists is obligatory for Mark “Donated $125.000 to Zaka” Zuckerberg.

    Also denial of the existence of israel is now forbidden in Germany and on Meta platforms. Free speech btw.

    • cygnus@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      2 years ago

      Also denial of the existence of israel is now forbidden in Germany and on Meta platforms. Free speech btw.

      Maybe it’s just me, but calling for the eradication of a country is bad (controversial take, I know)

        • cygnus@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          2 years ago

          I agree, but not a Palestine that occupies 100% of Israel.

          • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldBannedOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Israel is not a country.

            If israel wants to exist it can accept a two state solution with Palestine right now.

            You do not get to decide whether a colony is a country. The natives do.

            Saying israel is a country is similar to saying Crimea is actually Russian.

            • cygnus@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              12
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              Israel is not a country.

              OK I’m done with this conversation, lmao. Didn’t have to scratch your surface very much for the full-on hate to come out. Interesting how that happens so often with people who profess to simply be anti-zionist.

              • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldBannedOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                Recognition of israel comes from Palestinians not from posturing hypocrites.

                • cygnus@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  10
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 years ago

                  Thanks for the explanation, person who believes Jews are not native to Israel:

                  You do not get to decide whether a colony is a country. The natives do.

                  Definitely not a ragingly anti-Semitic opinion there, nope! Edit: same for the downvoters too. You all need to take a step back and re-examine your views. Jews have lived there for 3000 years.

                  • filister@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 years ago

                    Could you remind me how this turned out in most of America historically? And here by America I mean both North and South America.

        • MajinBlayze@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 years ago

          Pretending the state of Israel isn’t a form of regional power doesn’t make it go away.

          Don’t get me wrong, Israel has shown time and again that it does not deserve that power and must be dismantled. But that doesn’t sound like what the law is talking about.

          Maybe I’m being overly pedantic about the language in use

          • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldBannedOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            To be clear I’m talking about the government form of one single state and calling it Palestine, Not booting out everyone living there.

            Israel could be recognized as a country. In fact Palestinians have presented a two state solution for mutual recognition. If israel accepts it, it will become a country. Even Hamas has said to be open to this

            Palestinians have the right to recognize israel as a country as they have stolen their land. We do not have that right. Lucky for israel if they aren’t super Nazis looking to expand their Lebensraum, they can agree to that two state solution right now.

    • daddyjones@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 years ago

      shown that the term tends to be used to refer to Jews and Israelis, with dehumanising comparisons, calls to harm, or denials of existence,"

      This is not confusing the two - this is specifically targeting anti-semitism

      • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldBannedOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        No this is banning criticism of israel along with it. Using Judaism as a shield for Zionists.

        If they wanted to ban antisemitism they would not have included non-antisemitism in there.

        • daddyjones@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          You think that dehumanising, calling for harm or denials of Jewish existence aren’t anti-semitism?

          • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldBannedOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Why are you bringing up Judaism?

            The article separately mentions Zionism. This has nothing to do with Judaism.

            • daddyjones@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 years ago

              You mentioned Judaism. You think Zionism had nothing to do with Judaism? You think dehumanising anyone - including Zionists is ok?

      • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 years ago

        That is exactly it. Antisemites figured out a while back that they could say whatever they want about Jews as long as they swap out the word Zionist. This has been a feature of white supremacy for ages. It used to be “people with big noses” or “people who wear hats” or even “bankers,” or “globalists.” The latter two are more similar to the use of “Zionist” because they represent actual groups that people criticize. That gives more cover to the actual antisemites.

        This is actually a good thing, because it removes that cover from bigots who want to hijack the movement and hide behind it.

        • tjsauce@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Isn’t it incredibly dangerous to ban “Zionist” only because it’s misused? It can be used to legitimately describe people who have a vested interest in Isreal occupying Palestine. I understand it’s used as a slur, but banning otherwise normal words will make the discourse much more difficult.

          • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            Who said anything about banning it? You can read the full statement here. As I said, this is about bigots co-opting the word to say bigoted shit, taking into account the nuance of how a word can be used or misused. Literally no one other than propagandists are talking about Meta “banning” the word.

            We do not allow content that attacks people on the basis of protected characteristics such as nationality, race, or religion, among others. We do allow people to criticize adherents of political affiliations and ideologies.

            • tjsauce@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              My apologies, I did not read the article on the assumption Meta would choose the irresponsible option. The article was surprisingly nuanced, and I hope the enforcement of Meta’s policies are equally nuanced.