Due to technological advances, social media plays a role model in changing perceptions and discussions about the world’s issues, including the Israel-Palestine conflict. Companies like Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, and TikTok and X, previously known as Twitter, are critical players in shaping how millions worldwide perceive this dynamic and drawn-out conflict. However, these platforms are also being criticised for how they moderate content about conflict, bias, censorship or selective application of community standards and policies. 

 Meta: Is There a Difference between Moderation Supportiveness and Censorship?

 The content management connected with the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians recently brought Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram, into the limelight. People on these platforms can support Israel, call for peace, or have concerns about the state of Palestine. However, supporting it is strictly prohibited on Meta since it rumps with Hamas, an organisation recognised as an extremist. This classification means any content created by Hamas or in its support cannot be posted, and anyone linked to the organisation cannot use the platforms. 

 Due to increasing problems with false and fake information, Meta cooperates with fact-checking companies, putting warning labels on bogus information. At times, though, their efforts could have been better. One of the most egregious examples was the moment when the word ‘terrorist’ appeared in the profiles of some Palestinian individuals using Instagram. Meta said it was due to a problem in the Arabic translation of buttons used in the service. However, detractors have pointed out that such errors are not simple technicalities; they signify severe issues with the content moderation policies on the platform. 

 In the course of the sharp Gaza-Israel war of 2021, an outside study that Meta had sponsored found that this also suppresses the political liberties of Palestinians. This accords with more contemporary allegations of content suppression. 

There are many accounts, including those of celebrities like Bella Hadid, who reported that they were ‘shadow banned’ on Instagram in response to posting content supporting Palestine. Shadow banning is a process where an account or its content is made less visible to other users without the owner’s consent based on some violations supposedly committed. 

 Activist organisations, for instance, 7amleh, which tracks human rights abuses, have reported cases of Facebook and Instagram removing pro-Palestine content. The advocacy manager of 7amleh, Jalal Abukhater, explained that there has always been a significant attempt to control anything related to Palestine. At the same time, the Israeli authorities create the definitions of extreme prejudice and hostility as far as social media is concerned and enjoy practically unrestricted freedom. Many people question Meta’s policies of moderating the platform’s content and whether this is fair to all users. 

 TikTok: Moving from the Entertainment Industry to Political Theatre 

 One previously joked-off social media platform that has rapidly grown into a primary source of news and political discussions among youths is TikTok. The platform’s concerns are relevant in the aspects that have received reflection around the world: Black Lives Matter, the Coronavirus pandemic, and the Israel-Gaza conflict. 

 But at the same time, there are complaints about the app that the company is allegedly trying to hide the Palestinians. For example, during the coverage of the conflict, Mondoweiss, an independent news outlet, said that its TikTok account was permanently banned, which the outlet called censorship. Some TikTok creators have also stated that their videos supporting Palestine have been censored, and thus, the apps’ content moderation policies are put to debate. 

 However, a counterpoint has credited the application of TikTok in the conflict as applicable since it has created awareness of events that would otherwise not have been reported. However, it has also brought some memorable roles, such as sharing fake news or misinformation, which stem from the platform’s policy of permitting some categories of prohibited content under the premise of ‘newsworthiness’ or ‘counter-speech’. This is especially so where videos that have been misrepresented in events within the Israel-Gaza conflict are showcased for further distribution, thus fueling unbalanced reporting as well as propaganda materials. 

 X (Twitter): A Breeding Ground for Disinformation 

 X, which used to be Twitter, has been flooded with lies during the Israel-Gaza conflict. This has been sharp, with image sharing and micro-blogging growth quickly spreading fake or inaccurate information. Some blame it on alterations made by Elon Musk after purchasing the platform. These have included cutting down on staff assigned to fight fake news and increasing the use of community-flagged fact checks through the Community Notes. 

 Although the idea behind Community Notes is quite effective when debunking fiction news, it has failed in the present armed confrontation when the number of posts is much higher. The rate of fake’ appearance is much higher as well. This has resulted in the creation of counterfeit and, more often than not, hateful content, which adds to the problem of understanding truth from lies. Thus, the site’s stimulating system encouraging users to repost content with many views does not contribute to the solution of the issue and worsens it. 

 A clear and particularly shocking case of disinformation about X is the fact that many people believed the completely unreliable news about the beheading of forty babies by Hamas in Kfar Azza. This ‘news’ was first published by an Israeli newspaper, which was followed by the Israeli prime minister’s office and even US President Joe Biden, though this was later withdrawn. They show the risks of uncontrolled misinformation on some social networks, especially during the war. 

 Through its large followership, social media provides the general public with a framework for viewing significant events such as the Israel-Palestine conflict. Although these forums can create awareness and encourage the mobilisation of discussion on specific topics, they are also tainted with prejudice, censorship, and the proliferation of false information. Therefore, these companies must ensure that they use moderation policies that respect the freedom of speech while suppressing undesirable content that is malicious or fake news. And only under such a nuanced approach to the organisation’s causes can social media platforms be valuable and meaningful in the digital world.