Social media giant Meta has relaxed its content regulations, now permitting posts that refer to women as property or household items on its platforms.
Updated Meta Hateful Conduct Policy Sparks Controversy
Published Jan 14, 2025 at 13:56
Meta, the tech giant, has unveiled a significant revamp of its hateful conduct policy, aiming to alleviate concerns over censorship and boost free speech. However, critics argue that these changes perpetuate hate speech, particularly against the LGBTQAI+ community.
After Mark Zuckerberg announced Meta's intention to tackle false information through community notes and added context to misleading posts rather than deleting them, the company has now expanded its definition of acceptable speech.
In a statement, Meta declared that it will focus enforcement on illegal and high-severity violations, allowing more speech that is part of mainstream discourse. The updates mean that users will now be permitted to refer to transgender or non-binary people as "it," a change that has drawn criticism for its dehumanizing nature.
The policy also permits allegations of mental illness or abnormality based on gender or sexual orientation, given the political and religious discourse about transgenderism and homosexuality. Furthermore, users will now be allowed to refer to women as household objects or property, a move some have likened to Margaret Atwood's "The Handmaid's Tale."
Additionally, Meta has removed prohibitions against statements denying the existence of "protected" groups, such as statements that a certain group of people doesn't or shouldn't exist. The policy now allows content arguing in favor of gender-based limitations in the military, law enforcement, and teaching jobs.
Language targeting people based on their protected characteristics, such as race, ethnicity, and gender identity, when combined with claims that they have or spread the coronavirus, will now be acceptable. This change raises concerns about reinforcing racial stereotypes that minorities are spreading the virus because they are 'unclean' and 'unwashed.'
Meta spokesperson Corey Chambliss confirmed to WIRED that these restrictions will be loosened globally. In response to expected backlash, Zuckerberg acknowledged that the new approach would lead to catching less harmful content but would reduce the number of innocent posts and accounts unintentionally taken down.
Critics argue that this change amounts to legitimizing abuse towards women and the LGBTQAI+ community on Meta platforms, aimed at pleasing a new far-right government. Meta's policy shifts come as the conglomerate seeks to curry favor with Donald Trump and other Republican leaders ahead of the President-elect's second term.
These changes mirror a response to longstanding conservative criticisms that Meta has been unfairly censoring right-wing voices to promote a liberal agenda on its platforms.
Relevant Enrichment Data:
- The updated policy has serious implications for both free speech and the LGBTQAI+ community, with significant controversy surrounding its impact.
- LGBTQ advocacy organizations, including GLAAD, have condemned Meta's changes as "dangerous and dehumanizing," particularly since the policy now permits harmful rhetoric framed under political or religious expression.
- The community-facing policies lack transparency about how Meta collects and uses data related to sexual orientation and gender identity, limiting LGBTQ users' control over sensitive information.
The updated Meta policy, engulfed in controversy, has stirred debate within the realms of general-news and politics, as critics claim it legitimizes abuse towards the LGBTQAI+ community and women. This, in turn, has raised concerns about reinforcing prejudicial ideologies, such as the perpetuation of racial stereotypes that minorities are spreading the coronavirus. The policy's relaxation on speech regulations, including allowing users to refer to transgender or non-binary people as "it" and permitting statements denying the existence of protected groups, has been heavily criticized by LGBTQ advocacy organizations like GLAAD as "dangerous and dehumanizing."
