Meta is now granting its users new freedom to post a wide array of derogatory remarks about races, nationalities, ethnic groups, sexual orientations, and gender identities, training materials obtained by The Intercept reveal.

Examples of newly permissible speech on Facebook and Instagram highlighted in the training materials include:

“Immigrants are grubby, filthy pieces of shit.”

“Gays are freaks.”

“Look at that tranny (beneath photo of 17 year old girl).”

The changes are part of a broader policy shift that includes the suspension of the company’s fact-checking program. The goal, Meta said Tuesday, is to “allow more speech by lifting restrictions.”

While Kaplan and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg have couched the changes as a way to allow users to engage more freely in ideological dissent and political debate, the previously unreported policy materials reviewed by The Intercept illustrate the extent to which purely insulting and dehumanizing rhetoric is now accepted.

Kate Klonick, a content moderation policy expert who spoke to The Intercept, contests Meta’s framing that the new rules as less politicized, given the latitude they provide to attack conservative bogeymen.

“Drawing lines around content moderation was always a political enterprise,” said Klonick, an associate professor of law at St. John’s University and scholar of content moderation policy. “To pretend these new rules are any more ‘neutral’ than the old rules is a farce and a lie.”

She sees the shifts announced by Kaplan — a former White House deputy chief of staff under George W. Bush and Zuckerberg’s longtime liaison to the American right — as “the open political capture of Facebook, particularly because the changes are pandering to a particular party.”

Another policy shift: “Referring to the target as genitalia or anus are now considered non-violating and are allowed.” As an example of what is now permissible, Facebook offers up: “Italians are dickheads.”

While many of the examples and underlying policies seem muddled, the document shows clarity around allowing disparaging remarks about transgender people, including children. Noting that “‘Tranny’ is no longer a designated slur and is now non-violating,” the materials provide three examples of speech that should no longer be removed: “Trannies are a problem,” “Look at that tranny (beneath photo of 17 year old girl),” and “Get these trannies out of my school (beneath photo of high school students).”

According to Jillian York, director for international freedom of expression at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Meta’s hate speech protections have historically been well-intentioned, however deeply flawed in practice. “While this has often resulted in over-moderation that I and many others have criticized, these examples demonstrate that Meta’s policy changes are political in nature and not intended to simply allow more freedom of expression,” York said.

Meta has faced international scrutiny for its approach to hate speech, most notably after role that hate speech and other dehumanizing language on Facebook played in fomenting genocide in Myanmar. Following criticism of its mishandling of Myanmar, where the United Nations found Facebook had played a “determining role” in the slaughter of over 650,000 Rohingya Muslims, the company spent years touting its investment in preventing the spread of similar rhetoric in the future.

“The reason many of these lines were drawn where they were is because hate speech often doesn’t stay speech, it turns into real world conduct,” said Klonick, the content moderation scholar.

  • x00z@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    34 minutes ago

    I’m a bit sad that many people here on Lemmy who have a lot more freedom of speech think this decision is bad. Less moderation should be considered a good thing. The internet has always had the rule that everything on the internet is a lie. That’s how I grew up with it anyways. And how it should be.

    The examples they gave are nothing more than examples. I don’t support those comments whatsoever, but in the context of allowing more free speech and using it as an example or as a guideline, I fully understand it. Moderators should be unbiased.

    People don’t realize that these examples have been cherry picked for a narrative. The media wants money and politicians want power. It goes both ways. “Right wingers are a bunch of fascist shitheads” would also be allowed. But that does not really get a lot of sensation going now does it.

  • Bieren@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Would be a shame if people reported the fake deaths of billionaires, politicians and celebrities. See if they keep with the no fact checking.

    Most likely this is just a change demanded by orange man after Zuck bent the knee.

  • Absaroka@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    7 hours ago

    This is basically Meta saying “we’re OK being a tool of right-wing propagandists, and have no problem with their bullshit impacting elections, because it’ll make us boatloads of money.”

  • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    10 hours ago

    So they basically reinvented the COD lobby on Xbox 360, circa 2007? Shit’s gonna be wild.

    I do kind of miss the old internet where everything goes. Was it wildly offensive? Absolutely. But everyone gave as good as they got. I’d rather have a place that’s a bit too permissive than one that censors every opinion to death.

    Still, fuck Facebook, Fuck Zuck & Free Luigi.

    • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I do kind of miss the old internet where everything goes.

      It was fun but it built up to shit like 8chan and kiwi farms. This is why aliens won’t talk to us.

    • HejMedDig@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Sure, letting COD dudes call each other gay, and being generally mean to each other, you could argue, is a part of the game. If you don’t like it. Don’t play COD.

      But in real life, if you have vulnerable people, that suddenly have a target on their back, it’s not going to end well for them.

      • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Oh definitely. And it’s going to be an issue with people using real names. I’m not gonna be too bothered by ‘xXPussyslayer420Xx’ calling me a slur, but if it’s Bob Smith from my own city, I might just go over there and shit on his doorstep.

  • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Insurance CEOs are immoral.

    Billionaires are garbage.

    “Pædo” under Kavanaugh

    Donald’s a dickhead, complete with pubes.

    Meta’s a bog, and Zuck is its boggart.

    Free enough?

    (Too bad I don’t have an account to test it out.)

  • don@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Republicans are grubby, filthy pieces of shit.

    Conservatives are immoral.

    Christians are child-sacrificing, pedophilic ghouls.

    ——

    Test the algorithm with these and see what happens.

  • ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Are users also free to post about the fact that Zuckerberg fucks his Roomba every night after everyone else at his house has fallen asleep

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    17 hours ago

    When users instantly turn it against Zuckerberg, will they be as accepting?

    Totally how a normal human drinks water.

    • ScoopMcPoops@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 hours ago

      B-b-b-but think of the poor marginalized billionaires! They didn’t choose to be better off as fertilizer or pig feed! It’s the poors who are wrong! How can someone with all that money be wrong?

  • BaroqueInMind
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Y’all are fucking blind if you don’t think this is more about money, because they are losing huge swaths of mentally retarded Republicans moving to Twitter and TruthSocial because they can hate on minorities easier there.

    Meta is simply trying to appeal to those pieces of shit to stay on their platform so they can sell more ad revenue.

    Occams Razor.

    • Mr_Blott@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      That’s how *free speech proves itself to be a thoroughly outdated and backward ideal

      How does it feel to still think like someone from three centuries ago?

      If I wind you up enough are you going to threaten to get in your schooner and come and beat me with a cat-o-nine-tails, six months from now? 😂