[ad_1]
For years, groups of celebrities, human rights organizations, and even regular veteran users have asked Meta to take LGBTQ safety concerns seriously. These orders are coming back at least a decade It extends until last January, when the Facebook Oversight Board was formed He called it failure To support rules aimed at reducing anti-trans hate speech. The board noted that the fundamental problem “lies not in the policies, but in their implementation.” Her conclusion: Meta “does not live up to the ideals I articulated for LGBTQIA+ safety.”
Followed by that black eye Another letter About 250 celebrities, including Elliot Page, Ariana Grande, Jamie Lee Curtis and Judd Apatow, wrote in last June saying that meta platforms are filled with offensive content calling trans and non-binary people sexual predators, and arguing that this appears to be happening, from Coincidentally. At the same time as an influx of harassment against prominent LGBTQ users.
Their message was supported by several major LGBT advocacy groups, one of which was GLAAD. This week — nine months after Meta got the order — GLAAD was released New report Which essentially brings in receipts, documenting new examples of anti-LGBTQ material posted from June 2023 to March 2024. These posts range from slurs to actual calls for violence against trans people, much of which is interspersed with descriptions of the LGBTQ community as “satanic.” “The pretentious ones,” “the terrorists,” or “the deviants.”
Hate speech is a broad category: some terms are merely offensive, while others enter more serious territory in that they appear to, directly or indirectly, call on people to commit acts of violence against certain groups. But Meta claims that user behavior should conform to a robust set of behaviors Community standards, where he wrote, “We remove hate speech, harassment, threats of violence, and other content that has the potential to silence others or cause harm.” It offers this via Facebook, Instagram, and Threads specific language Definition of hate speech, what constitutes violent or graphic content, and what type of behavior is considered incitement, bullying, or harassment.
GLAAD says it has registered formal complaints about all the anti-LGBTQ content found in its report, noting the policies it believes were violated. The group claims that in each case, “Meta either deemed the content not to violate its policies, or simply took no action on it.”
Some of the content was posted or promoted by or engaged by media figures with very large followings. Among the more troubling posts that GLAAD says Meta allowed to remain are:
- Trailers for a documentary titled “LGBT Terrorists.”
- Posts that offended multiple groups, such as a cartoon that said “Jews are pushing pornography and degeneracy on our children,” then depicted a man at a school bus stop wearing the phrase “Thank heavens for little girls!” shirt. (Among the comments it sparked was: “We fought the wrong enemy in World War II.”)
- An Instagram post in January asked: “What do you think should be done for doctors who perform ‘gender affirming care’ procedures on minors?” Then he added: “Let us know in the comments.” (Suggestions included imposing the same exact measures on them, as well as “Nuremberg 2.0.”)
- An Instagram post called trans people “demons” and showed a twisted body being stoned to death, though all the stones were replaced with laughing emojis.
- Posts that GLAAD says cross the line from “implicit” to “blatant” calls for violence, like a November Instagram post, set to the song “Fleshkiller” by Christian metalcore band Phinehas, in which a masked guard holds an assault rifle while stomping on the head of a winged, horned creature He wears a brightly colored uniform. “May the holy saints guide you to glory,” the caption read, with the hashtags #rifle, #ar15, #gay, #transrights and #trans.
- Another post in October had Angel strangling a pink-bearded person wearing eyeliner and fetish clothing, while a masked person beat them with a bat. “Help us do the Lord’s work,” the post’s creator asks, above the hashtags #guardianangel, #trans, #gay and #bat.
GLAAD points to previous public statements in which Meta acknowledged that hate speech on its own platforms “may in some cases encourage offline violence,” noting that such statements make the delay in curbing this type of misconduct “even more shocking.” “.
Meta did not respond to questions asked to confirm that it received takedown requests from GLAAD — and, if it did, to explain the reasons it chose not to remove content featuring the names of marginalized groups and armed people attacking other individuals.
In a statement accompanying the report, GLAAD reiterated its intentions here to “continue calling on Meta to share a plan to address the epidemic of anti-trans hate and violence on its platforms.”
[ad_2]
Source link
