Earlier this week, Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg said the Biden administration had pressured the company to “censor” COVID-19 content during the pandemic, apparently referring to White House requests to take down misinformation about the coronavirus and vaccines.

In a letter dated August 26, Zuckerberg told the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee that he regretted not speaking up about this pressure earlier, as well as other decisions he had made as the owner of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp around removing certain content, which included humor and satire.

This is a shocking revelation from Zuckerberg considering his company presides over premier social networking and communication platforms, which are seen as paramount in the sharing and dissemination of information especially during times of crisis such as Covid-19.

Zuckerberg added how he is stopping political contributions and has revised policies regarding such suppression.

What spurred this revelation and is Meta on the verge of a redirect?

Western media when it comes to Israel and Palestine: tale of two very different realities

“We made some choices that, with the benefit of hindsight and new information, we wouldn’t make today,” he continued.

“Our position has been clear and consistent: we believe tech companies and other private actors should take into account the effects their actions have on the American people, while making independent choices about the information they present.”

Zuckerberg said he and Meta would be ready to “push back” if something similar happened in the future.

But this revelation points to another form of censorship — one that is taking place even today and something that Palestinian activists and journalists have been denouncing for months: that Meta-owned Instagram is censoring content, accounts, posts, images and news reports of the Israeli carnage in Gaza.

Can we consider the US government complicit in this as well?

Consider this, neither the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) nor the Israeli government have granted permission for foreign media to report freely from within Gaza, leaving much of what we are seeing in the hands of citizen journalists, bloggers, activists and a handful of local media channels, the largest being Al Jazeera.

Important to note here: this has also been the deadliest war for journalists with over 130 persons killed since the beginning of the war, many in brazen targeted attacks by the IDF.

Amid this, there’s Meta, overseeing the distribution and sharing of said content on these social media accounts. And therein lies the murk.

Journalists such as Shaun King, who were actively posting updates on the carnage in Gaza, have had to register new accounts as new users in order to continue to communicate with their followers. In an effort to evade Meta’s filtering parameters of what it deems appropriate content, he cannot post anything and instead, has this note up.

Other popular individuals such as Motaz Azaiza and Ahmed Eldin have complained of suppression measures, and users noted how these filters were only working to disproportionately affect posts about Palestine.

Pakistani author Fatima Bhutto has also stated Instagram was shadowbanning her and limiting comments and story views.

“I am learning so much about how democracies and big tech work together to suppress information during illegal wars they are unable to manufacture consent for,” she wrote on X.

Some users also accused Instagram of arbitrarily taking down posts that simply mention Palestine for violating “community guidelines”.

In a post on X on October 15, Meta spokesperson Andy Stone blamed the reduced reach of posts on a bug.

Meta’s parameters, it seems, are dangerously wide or narrow depending on what one is trying to post. An image of a bombed infant in Gaza can be censored or a post of a bombed university can be considered “antisemitic” depending on the day.

“Hamas is designated by the US government as both a Foreign Terrorist Organisation and Specially Designated Global Terrorists,” writes Meta, explaining its revised guidelines following October 7.

“This means Hamas is banned from our platforms, and we remove praise and substantive support of them when we become aware of it, while continuing to allow social and political discourse — such as news reporting, human rights related issues, or academic, neutral and condemning discussion.”

No criticism about war crimes or genocidal intent will get past Meta’s filters either.

“Meta’s goal is to allow people to express themselves while still removing harmful content,” it continues.

“We continue to remove any imagery that is produced by a Dangerous Organization or Individual, unless it is clear that the user is sharing it in a news reporting or condemnation context…”

“In the three days following October 7, we removed or marked as disturbing more than 795,000 pieces of content for violating these policies in Hebrew and Arabic.

“As compared to the two months prior, in the three days following October 7, we have removed seven times as many pieces of content on a daily basis for violating our Dangerous Organizations and Individuals policy in Hebrew and Arabic alone.”

This is not news. We knew Meta as well as Elon Musk-owned X were removing accounts regarded as “inappropriate”.

Trouble in (genocidal) paradise?

A Human Rights Watch report in a December 2023 titled ‘Meta’s Broken Promises: Systemic Censorship of Palestine Content on Instagram and Facebook’ noted that between October and November 2023 there were “over 1,050 takedowns and other suppression of content Instagram and Facebook that had been posted by Palestinians and their supporters, including about human rights abuses.”

“Of the 1,050 cases reviewed for this report, 1,049 involved peaceful content in support of Palestine that was censored or otherwise unduly suppressed..” and on and on.

The Human Rights Watch also found that “Meta failed to meet its human rights due diligence responsibilities”.

But the question is; what is Meta going to do about it.

Whether its pressure by the US government, advertisers, lobbyists, will it remain complicit in suppressing dissent and outcries against genocide and Israeli aggression, or will it allow a democratic i.e. open and fair use of its platform.

In the same letter, Zuckerberg also admitted that his firm briefly “demoted” content relating to US President Joe Biden’s son Hunter ahead of the 2020 election – not a dissimilar activity from what Democrats have been accusing former president Donald Trump of using the power of his presidency to do.

Is the US ‘sleepwalking’ into a wider conflict in the Middle East?

Regardless, along with its continuous veto against a ceasefire in the UN Security Council, the US is now also likely guilty of suppressing dissent about the war in Gaza, and denying Palestinians their right to self-determination – all coming from the echelons of the highest office.

This is tantamount to promoting the proliferation of false narratives and propaganda at the hands of the IDF and the Israeli government, especially if it continues to remain unchecked on Meta’s platforms.

Bravo! We expected nothing less from the land of the free.

It was for the uniquely free and fair element that social media platforms came into being and immediately became popular; they gave an equal voice to everyone. Now, there are filters in place parsing through free speech under the aegis of community guidelines.

But when the stakes are this high, the onus of the right to free and fair information and its distribution should not lie in the hands of any government, but private citizenry – should they manage to scuttle past Meta’s filters first.

The article does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Business Recorder or its owners