In its first Threads case, Meta’s Oversight Board asked for clarification on the death threats

Meta’s Oversight Board has ruled in its original Threads case and reversed the company’s original decision and original appeal. Regarding the post about outgoing Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, which uses a phrase that translates to “death/die” in English, the board ruled that the word was used figuratively and not as a real threat or call for violence.

The case was removed by a Threads document showing the issue involving Kishida and his reaction to his political party. (um) “Funding errors.” The document criticized the Prime Minister, accusing him of not paying taxes. The user’s response demanded an explanation from the government leader, and, calling him a tax evader, used the phrase “死ね,” or “throw away / die.” The post also included “hah” and derogatory language about people who wear glasses. (Look there, mate!)

Posts were ignored, disliked. But someone reported you under the Meta’s Bullying and Harassment rules. Three weeks later, one of the Meta moderators decided that it violated the Harassment and Promotion rules instead. The user filed a complaint, and another reviewer agreed with the first that it violated policy. Another appeal moved the board’s case, which accepted the case and dismissed the two human reviewers who removed it.

“In this case, the threat against a political leader was intended to criticize a political reality that draws attention to allegations of corruption, using strong language, which is unusual for Japanese social media,” Meta’s Oversight Board wrote in its statement. “It was unlikely that it would have caused any harm.” The board considered the use of the “hah” poster to help determine its symbolic meaning.

The board said that, despite speaking Japanese and understanding the site’s content, the moderators who removed the posts were “wrong.” It recommends Meta clarify its internal guidelines and provide additional guidance to reviewers on “how to analyze local language and content.”

Meta’s Oversight Board added that the Violence and Incitement policy including a rule prohibiting the use of “death to him” for “high-risk individuals” is not clear enough. It said that although the company’s policy raises contextual factors in threat assessment, its reviewers are empowered to assess cases that include the phrase “death to him”. The board reiterated its 2022 recommendation that Meta explain that verbal threats using the phrase are “generally permitted, unless directed at individuals at greatest risk, and to provide criteria for when threatening statements directed at heads of state are permitted to protect speech as political speech.” .”

In addition, the board recommended that Meta clarify how the policy differs from “public figures” vs. “people at high risk.” It calls into question why threats against public figures are only removed when they are “credible.” Conversely, those who oppose others are judged “regardless of loyalty.”

The Oversight Board had a busy September after deciding only 53 cases last year. Last week, it decided that the expression “From the River to the Sea” should not be banned and, in a situation like this, it distinguished death threats from “passionate statements” in Venezuela.