THANZYL THAJUDEEN
COLOMBO : Social media platforms are essential conduits for international discourse in the digital era, enabling discussions on a wide range of subjects such as human rights and social justice. But in the midst of this digital connectivity, an alarming pattern has surfaced: the suppression of voices that support Palestine. In addition to stifling free expression, this restriction helps spread false information and propaganda, which feeds into a narrative that stifles discussion and upholds injustice.
Social media sites, which are frequently hailed as bulwarks of unrestricted speech, have come under heavy fire for how they have handled information that supports the Palestinian cause. Opponents contend that these platforms unjustly suppress material that highlights the suffering of Palestinians while permittinug hate speech and false information to go unchallenged.
There are several recorded cases of hashtags, accounts, and posts supporting Palestinian rights being blocked or deleted without cause. Reports of content flagging, account suspensions, and postings being shadow-banned have been made by activists, journalists, and regular users for no other reason than showing support for Palestine or disseminating conflict-related news.
Activist Mohamad Safa from Lebanon, for instance, emphasised the difficulties experienced by proponents of Palestine, pointing out that they are frequently branded as “antisemitic” and get threats. Although social media brings out voices of various people, the platforms’ vulnerability to censorship and double standards greatly exist. The personal experiences of Mohammed Safa provide as another evidence of the consequences activists who expose injustices suffer, often becoming the target of both online and offline monitoring and death threats. Despite these obstacles, it is so reassuring to see individuals and groups continuing to expose war crimes and breaches of human rights, highlighting the vital role that journalists and social media platforms play in distributing factual information and refuting popular myths.
Between October and November of 2023, for example, Human Rights Watch recorded over 1,050 cases of content takedowns and censorship on Facebook and Instagram, mostly affecting nonviolent material that was pro-Palestine. Remarkably, there was just one instance where pro-Israel information had to be taken down. Hundreds more examples of censorship have been recorded than those listed by Human Rights Watch, highlighting structural problems with Meta’s content moderation system.
Six major patterns of excessive censoring are identified in the report; each appears at least 100 times. These consist of “shadow banning” tactics, account suspension or permanent deactivation, content engagement limitations, and the deletion of posts and comments. Users also mentioned that they had no way to challenge account limits, therefore they had no other options.
I for one, personally know many accounts in my LinkedIn circle who has got their accounts suspended for voicing justice and truth on Palestine. These platforms effectively impede genuine discourse and debate on one of the most urgent humanitarian crises of our time by limiting the distribution of information and suppressing dissenting voices. Activists contend that these platforms frequently yield to political pressure or give priority to the interests of influential people, eroding their seeming dedication to free speech.
Systematic silencing of one side of the story leaves a void that is frequently filled with false or distorted information, feeding prejudice and misunderstandings. Furthermore, via limiting access to different viewpoints and information sources, social media platforms unintentionally reinforce dominant narratives that could be intrinsically biassed or incomplete. In addition to warping public opinion, this makes it more difficult to have a sophisticated grasp of the intricate facts on the ground.
Social media companies must review their content moderation guidelines in order to guarantee better responsibility, transparency, and respect for other points of view in order to solve this issue. Users also need to keep up their efforts to expose censorship and provide voice to underrepresented groups, especially in the face of opposition or repression. We can work towards a more fair and inclusive digital environment—one in which the views of all people, including those who support Palestine, are heard and respected—by encouraging an atmosphere of candid discussion and lively debate.
There is so much of misinformation and fake news deliberately orchestrated and published in mainstream news outlets in the West. We all know some of their names. The blatant double standard is undeniable. The West’s complicity in this genocide showcases a moral collapse of alarming proportions. The last time a country fell victim to war madness and hate mongering, six million beautiful souls were killed. The USA was among the Western nations that did little to stop it. Remarkably, these same Western countries don’t appear to care that history is being repeated; they seem to believe that having participated in one genocide does not in any way relieve them of their past. Regretfully, on both occasions, they have not spoken up for the downtrodden. Instead, they approve and support it in all possible ways. This is the ‘first genocide in history where its victims are broadcasting their own destruction in real time, and in vain hope that the world might do something’ said Blinne Ní Ghrálaigh, The Hague, International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Jan 11, 2024.
It’s such a pity that the governments and nations who boast about their democracy and upholding human rights, and who are the first to condemn other countries they say allegedly ignore human rights and use torture, are actually the very same ones who violate all human laws and dignity. They very same nations that once colonized others. These social media companies are no exception; they simply follow their agendas and instructions passed top-down.
Social media firms have been accused of being hypocritical for supporting the values of free speech and open communication while enacting content moderation policies that are frequently ambiguous, erratic, and prejudiced. Platforms that selectively implement community norms, disproportionately targeting marginalised voices while ignoring hate speech and disinformation spread by influential players are among the examples cited by critics. Although these platforms frequently promote ideas of community, connectedness, and freedom of speech, it’s very obvious that their activities and regulations conceal a distinct reality that is influenced by algorithmic biases, political agendas, and profit.
No matter how hard they try, justice will prevail. Social media will be for the people’s interest. Free speech will thrive. Humanity will succeed. People are already waking up, to the truth. Racism and discrimination will perish. Palestine will rise once again, and so will all the nations that have been unjustly and systematically oppressed and destroyed by so-called civilized, capitalistic, superior nations, who have just stolen and plundered anything and everything from the diverse, culturally-rich, and intelligent East.
