3 ms·

"We won't allow credible calls for violence against Russian civilians," says Meta. They define credible as: having two "indicators of credibility", such as loc

"We won't allow credible calls for violence against Russian civilians," says Meta. They define credible as: having two "indicators of credibility", such as location or method. That is a considerably higher bar than for any other group. And that's referring to civilians, not soldiers. In a separate, internal memo, they explicitly say that hate speech and violent speech against Russian civilians is allowed "if the context is the Russian invasion". That's sufficiently vague that the policy allows for dehumanization.

AA-BA-94-2A-56 5y ago
> That's sufficiently vague that the policy allows for dehumanization. You're right to be concerned about dehumanisation, and to raise questions about Meta's ability to manage it. However, when you consider that they are only allowing hate speech for the region affected by Russia's war, you'll realise that most of the people venting will either be personally affected or know someone who is. I have to ask; in what way do you think someone could call for the death of Russian civilisans specifically in the context of the Russian invasion? I'm struggling to think of an example to support your argument. Perhaps you will provide one?