Meta’s Oversight Board demands clarity on new hate speech policies, urges greater transparency

Meta’s Oversight Board demands clarity on new hate speech policies urges greater transparency

By Mofeoluwa Awe

Meta’s Oversight Board has publicly responded to the company’s recently implemented hate speech standards, criticising the lack of openness and requesting detailed public disclosures.

The independent committee accountable for advising Meta on content moderation decisions expressed worries about the fast implementation, which was disclosed in January 2025. According to the Board, Meta violated its regular procedure by enacting the new regulations without proper consultation or explanation.

The Board has requested that the firm define its stance on hate speech, noting how the amended policy may affect vulnerable groups such as immigrants and LGBTQIA+ users. It also urged Meta to publicly analyse and disclose the effects of the adjustments, with updates every six months.

The regulations in question are part of a broader change begun by Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg to encourage “more speech” throughout the company’s platforms, which include Facebook, Instagram, and Threads. As part of this move, Meta reversed some content management standards that previously provided protections for marginalised communities.

The Board’s answer contains 17 formal recommendations, which include:

Evaluating the effectiveness of its new community notes system.

Clarifying the new attitude towards harmful ideology.

Increasing enforcement of harassment and hate speech violations.

Reaffirming commitment to the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights by discussing with affected stakeholders.

The Oversight Board also stated that it is actively working with Meta to create fact-checking standards in non-US countries, recognising the worldwide effect of content moderation choices.

While the Oversight Board cannot directly change Meta’s basic rules, the firm is required to follow its decisions on particular situations. A policy advisory opinion from Meta, which the board has already received, may provide a path to greater influence over corporate policy.

The Board’s most recent rulings involved 11 content moderation complaints across Meta’s platforms, addressing topics such as anti-migrant rhetoric, hate speech against persons with disabilities, and the suppression of LGBTQIA+ voices. The Board found Meta’s enforcement inconsistent, especially in an instance involving Facebook posts about anti-immigrant riots in the United Kingdom in 2024. Meta was chastised for moving too slowly to remove information that incited violence against Muslims and immigration.

In two U.S.-based complaints featuring videos of transgender women, the board upheld Meta’s decision to keep the posts but directed the firm to remove the term “transgenderism” from its Hateful Conduct policy due to its disparaging connotation.

The contrast between Meta’s emphasis on free speech and the Oversight Board’s recommendations for stronger safeguards reflects an ongoing discussion about platform responsibility and user safety. It is unclear whether Meta will change its policies in response to the board’s suggestions.