The more and more racist comments are being allowed to stand on FB

[JimandPam]

I am still a pretty frequent user of FB and find it useful for keeping in touch with overseas family and also part of hobby groups/kids days out ideas etc

I've always been a part of my local community Facebook and whilst most of the time comments/posts are in good faith, I've noticed more and more vile posts that are either racist or homophobic. I always report them using the appropriate tools

However, over the last 6 months I've noticed these comments are allowed to stand and I don't understand why

Two recent examples:
A community post about bad driving in a notorious spot in our town. I reported two comments

1. X Town used to be nice before all of Africa moved in
2. Never had this problem when they used to be on jam jars

After taking 30 days to review I've been told that neither of these comments break their community guidelines. What?? I've reopened them and added comments but I'm finding this more and more that my reporting is not being upheld

I know the simple answer is to use FB less but I'm seeing this all over SM where hateful comments are reported but not taken down.

AIBU to think the above should have simply been removed on reporting them or am I going mad?

It's disgusting, and I think that Facebook is even more shit now.

"gangs of the migrants" is such emotive language. Are they not just groups of migrants.

Exactly.

I've moved to Bluesky - it's like Twitter used to be in 2011.

I refuse now to read our South East news because many stories are about the people coming over on boats.
Absolutely cringe at the ignorance of the comments…can guarantee that the comments come from people who have done fuck all with their lives and are spongers!!

There maybe a “reason” but it’s never a good one.

How do you know “all the benches inside” were taken by “gangs of migrants”?

Presumably either went up to them and asked them "s'cuse me, are you all migrants from that there hotel?" or made an assumption that more than one black person sat together on a bench must be a "gang" of migrants.

@Tauranga mate it’s going to absolutely blow your mind when you hear about Hate Speech and that there is a legal definition for it.

Why should those definitions not apply to anything said on the internet?

I've had the exact same issue on both Facebook and TikTok! Just today I reported a comment saying "All P•••s should be banned and/or s••t" come back an hour later as 'No violations found' it's bloody infuriating. Our DC is growing up in this hate-filled world.

I keep reading stuff like this "gangs of migrants" doing what exactly? Sitting on benches - the horror! I've also seen similar comments about "gangs of migrants" standing on the street, talking. If all these people are asylum seekers then they are legally banned from getting a job until their claim is processed. They have just a few pounds a week to live on. Seriously, what are they supposed to do?? Stay locked in their hotel rooms like prisoners? Of course they need to get outside and talk to people.

Me too. I used to feel tense every time I opened Twitter. I feel calm on Blue Sky.

Oh yes.

I'm very aware of hate speech.
I don't agree with it existing.
It was hate for me to say a man was a man, if he had decided he wasn't.
It wasn't hate, it was reality, and being told it was hate was wrong.
Who decides?
Islamophobia; if I say I am uncomfortable with aspects of a religion, that is hate?
Can I dislike Islam, Christianity or any other religion, or is that hate?
Quashing peoples opinions doesn't work, and it is all these laws which have resulted in a massive backlash. The extreme left are to blame for these new comments.

I think people can freely and openly criticise any religion from a theoretical point and view (and they do). However, the hate speech I see on social media isn't a critique of Islam it's hateful speech directed against Muslims "They're paedophiles, they're criminals, they're taking over our country, they shouldn't be allowed to live here, send them back, they hate us, they want to kill us, they're terrorists etc etc". This is clearly hate speech and I don't think it should be allowed on platforms such as Facebook and Mumsnet. It is hugely damaging, it creates division, it creates fear and mistrust within the communities being targeted and within other communities who are believing what they read online. It normalises hate against certain groups. The number of people I've seen saying things like "It's what everyone thinks". It others and dehumanises large groups of people. It assigns negative qualities to millions of people based only on their religion or colour or sex.

That's why I've left. As PP said- racism using the excuse of "free speech"

@Tauranga

"I'm very aware of hate speech.
I don't agree with it existing."

In the early days of the Nazi's rise to power there was an explosion of anti-Jewish propaganda in the national media in Germany.

You can read about it here: https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/nazi-propaganda

Germans were told that Jews were dirty, venal, were dishonest and money grabbing. That they were a danger to children, and that there was an international conspiracy of Jews to take over the reins of control in European economies.

Not just newspapers. Films. Cartoons. Radio shows.

All designed to increase fear and mistrust of Jews.

In the Rwandan genocide Hutu people were persuaded to see their Tutsi neighbours as thieves and low life. The radio station RTLM broadcast a stream of 'entertainment' targeting young audiences with chat shows and music. From Wikipedia: 'It focused on anti-Tutsi propaganda. They characterised the Tutsi as a dangerous enemy who wanted to seize the political power at the expense of Hutus. By linking the Rwandan Patriotic Army with the Tutsi political party and ordinary Tutsi citizens, they classified the entire ethnic group as one homogeneous threat to Rwandans. The RTLM went further than amplifying ethnic and political division; it also labeled the Tutsi as inyenzi, meaning non-human pests or cockroaches, which must be exterminated."

So regardless of your opinion, hate speech absolutely does exist, has always been used to dehumanise minority groups to breakdown resistance to breaching their human rights, and historically has been used to political ends, as it's being used now.

@izimbra I've never seen any point arguing with bigots. Some people like wading through a cess pit of bile, they don't understand civility. It's ironic because they're often arguing that others are uncivilised.

Kill the boer, kill the farmer

This is being sung by a political party in South Africa.

Following a ruling by the South African Gauteng High Court in 2010, the song was ruled as hate speech, but this ruling was overturned in 2022 by the High Court in Johannesburg, who ruled that "Kill the Boer – Kill the farmer" was neither hate speech nor an incitement to violence.

My issue is who decides what is hate speech?
That is my entire point.
Who decides?

It's usually blindingly obvious. Look at Mumsnet - there are strict talk rules about what's allowed and what's not allowed. Generally, if you're maligning an entire group of people based on sex, religion, race, etc then it's hate speech. There are already hate speech laws in the UK. This is from Wikipedia:
"Expressions of hatred toward someone on account of that person's colour, race, sex, disability, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origin, religion, or sexual orientation is forbidden"

@Tauranga

Do you think the example you gave is 'hate speech'?

Do you think it incites violence against a group of people?

"I don't agree with it existing" is you saying 'there is no such thing' - which is a different point from the one you're making here, which is about how a government labels speech.

I don't think it is hate speech to say that a man in a dress is a man.
I don't think it's hate speech to say that I worry about some groups of Muslims in the UK who appear to actively hate our way of life, want to enact some of the more fundamental aspects of Islam (especially re women and children), and who don't want to integrate.
I think that fundamentalist Christians are equally worrying and misguided, but there don't seem to be such large numbers of them, and there isn't the racial element, so people are less worried about offending them, or being seen as racist or far right.

I don't think that every concern about these things should be shoved into the too easy grab bag of racism or fascism, but I am also concerned that we may be sleepwalking into just that.
To get the balance right in a multicultural country is incredibly difficult, and it seems from what I read about many countries in Europe that no one has, the UK included, or maybe the UK especially.
The rate of immigration has been unprecedented and I'm not surprised that people resent it.
British people are now the minority in their own capital city, for example. I'm uncomfortable with that.
But the grooming/rape gangs and reports of no go areas and enactment of Sharia law in some areas, without intervention, if true, is also disturbing.
We haven't got diversity and multiculturalism right, and unless it gets sorted out, we are going to ricochet into far right politics, or worse.

@Giggorata

"I don't think it is hate speech to say that a man in a dress is a man."

Do you think transgender women don't know they're biologically not female?

Do you think those of us who accept transgender women on their own terms are not aware that they are biologically male?

If the answer is - yes, people know this, then ask yourself what the purpose is of constantly repeating that a transgender woman 'is a man in a dress', except to try to ridicule and shame transgender women?

Out of interest, do you also go around constantly pointing out that transmen are 'just women with beards'?

If not, why not? Why don't you go around constantly saying things intended to ridicule transgender men?

Or go around loudly pointing out that people are fat?

If the only time you ever refer to transgender people it's to ridicule them or drum up fear of them - it's because you're intending to stir up contempt and hatred towards a minority group. Just own it.

@Giggorata

"British people are now the minority in their own capital city, for example. I'm uncomfortable with that."

Do you want to explain why you're 'uncomfortable' with that? What is it that upsets you about it?

Your comments about Sharia law and 'no go areas' are laughable and clearly point to you having been radicalised by far right content on social media.

"We haven't got diversity and multiculturalism right"

Says who? Go into any NHS hospital and look at the workforce. That's what diversity and multiculturalism look like. What's your problem with that?

I would question how many Muslims living here actually do actively hate our way of life and want to introduce Sharia Law. I think it's a very small minority. These ideas about Muslims are continually being pedalled and repeated in social media so that we've reached a stage where people are hating Muslims based on what they've read on X, without ever having had a meaningful conversation with a Muslim.
I live in an area with a high number of Muslims and I just don't recognise the picture I see painted of Muslims. The Muslims I know do not hate our way of life. Most are living very similar lives to us and are integrated. I don't know a single Muslim who has any interest in introducing Sharia Law here. The Muslims I know are polite and respectful and just want to live in peace. We are always being welcomed into the homes of Muslim friends and colleagues, our local Imam frequently opens up the mosque for people to pop in, if they're interested.
No, it's not hate speech to express concerns about certain cultures or religions, but I'd ask how many of these concerns are based on reality and how many are based on misinformation or racist notions.