BBC Accuses Facebook of Limiting Palestinian News During Israel-Gaza War

[Social Media]

 

Facebook has faced significant criticism for limiting the reach of Palestinian news outlets during the Israel-Gaza conflict, as revealed by BBC research. Analyzing Facebook data, the BBC found that audience engagement for newsrooms in Gaza and the West Bank experienced a dramatic decline, starting in October 2023.  

 

A BBC Arabic investigation highlights that prominent Palestinian-based news organizations suffered a 77% drop in engagement following the Hamas attacks on Israel on 7 October 2023. Engagement, which includes metrics such as comments, reactions, and shares, is a key indicator of the visibility and impact of social media content. During wartime, engagement is generally expected to rise as audiences seek updates. However, the opposite occurred for these newsrooms.  

 

Palestine TV, one of the affected outlets, reported a 60% drop in the visibility of its posts, despite having a substantial following of 5.8 million people. “Interaction was completely restricted, and our posts stopped reaching people,” said journalist Tariq Ziad, reflecting broader frustrations among Palestinian journalists. Many have accused Meta, Facebook’s parent company, of “shadow-banning” their content, restricting how many users can see it.  

 

Meta has denied allegations of deliberate suppression. The company acknowledged implementing "temporary product and policy measures" in October 2023, citing challenges in balancing freedom of speech while addressing the designation of Hamas as a US-sanctioned and dangerous organization under Meta’s policies. “We acknowledge we make mistakes, but any implication that we deliberately suppress a particular voice is unequivocally false,” a Meta spokesperson stated.  

 

Leaked documents suggest that Instagram, another Meta-owned platform, modified its algorithm shortly after the October 2023 attacks, intensifying moderation of comments from Palestinian users. According to an anonymous source, this algorithmic adjustment made moderation “more aggressive towards Palestinian people.” Internal communications reveal that an engineer within the company raised concerns about the change, warning it could introduce bias against Palestinian users.  

 

Meta confirmed the change but argued it was a necessary response to a surge in “hateful content” emerging from the Palestinian territories. This acknowledgment adds to the broader debate over the role of social media companies in moderating content during sensitive geopolitical events.  

 

While Meta maintains that it has not intentionally suppressed any voices, the sharp decline in engagement for Palestinian news organizations raises questions about the unintended consequences of its content moderation policies. These developments have intensified concerns among journalists and activists about the fairness and transparency of Meta’s actions in conflict zones.  

 

Based on a report by BBC 2024-12-19

 

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

5 hours ago, Social Media said:

A BBC Arabic investigation highlights

Says it all, the most unreliable service in the BBC for the Gaza conflict now trying to expose Facebook for their curbs on hate and terrorist supporters of Hamas.

[JonnyF]

Seems the BBC is upset that Palestine and their "freedom fighters" as the BBC likes to call Hamas, are not getting the same propaganda on FaceBook that the BBC affords them.  

[stevenl]

This is the issue.

"These developments have intensified concerns among journalists and activists about the fairness and transparency of Meta’s actions in conflict zones. "

It goes imo beyond Meta.

[Bkk Brian]

 

 

A very small example of BBC Arabic

 

Head of BBC Global Service ‘Told Journalists That Hamas Is No Less Credible Than Israel & October 7 Attack Should Not Be Called a Massacre’

 

 

 

[roquefort]

Pot, kettle, black.

[Purdey]

9 hours ago, Social Media said:

Meta confirmed the change but argued it was a necessary response to a surge in “hateful content” emerging from the Palestinian territories.

Seems like blocking hateful comment has become censorship.

[WDSmart]

All Western news and social media are extremely biased to pro-Israeli information sources. It's only been lately that the pro-Palestinian side of this conflict is being brought to light.  

[Scouse123]

54 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

All Western news and social media are extremely biased to pro-Israeli information sources. It's only been lately that the pro-Palestinian side of this conflict is being brought to light.  

 

 

Rubbish,

 

The Arab Palestinians have had plenty of access to news and social media and, many times, more than they should have or deserve.

[WDSmart]

2 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

 

 

Rubbish,

 

The Arab Palestinians have had plenty of access to news and social media and, many times, more than they should have or deserve.

The Arab Palestinians deserve as much access to news and social media as the Jewish Israelis. There are two sides to this story. 

[coolcarer]

6 hours ago, stevenl said:

This is the issue.

"These developments have intensified concerns among journalists and activists about the fairness and transparency of Meta’s actions in conflict zones. "

It goes imo beyond Meta.

Where beyond Meta does this go? Or was that just a baseless opinion?

[WDSmart]

3 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

Where beyond Meta does this go? Or was that just a baseless opinion?

As I stated above, it goes, IMO, in almost all Western news and social media, especially conservative ones. Now, more liberal news and media are starting to include information and accounts from both sides of the conflict. 

[coolcarer]

4 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

As I stated above, it goes, IMO, in almost all Western news and social media, especially conservative ones. Now, more liberal news and media are starting to include information and accounts from both sides of the conflict. 

Another baseless opinion devoid of facts. Check out the reports on the anti Israel BBC to start you off

[WDSmart]

9 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

Another baseless opinion devoid of facts. Check out the reports on the anti Israel BBC to start you off

I'll admit I do not watch the BBC. My main source of news is CNN. They were initially pro-Israel but lately have begun to report more on the pro-Palestinian side. The only time I see articles from the BBC or FOX is on this forum or when someone comments on them on social media. If the BBC has really been anti-Israel, that's news to me (pardon the pun).

[coolcarer]

1 minute ago, WDSmart said:

I'll admit I do not watch the BBC. My main source of news is CNN. They were initially pro-Israel but lately have begun to report more on the pro-Palestinian side. The only time I see articles from the BBC or FOX is on this forum or when someone comments on them on social media. If the BBC has really been anti-Israel, that's news to me (pardon the pun).

If it’s news to you about the BBC then you have just confirmed how blind you are to the anti Israel bias of most western media

[WDSmart]

11 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

If it’s news to you about the BBC then you have just confirmed how blind you are to the anti Israel bias of most western media

I'm from the USA. Why would I watch the BBC when I can watch CNN? Besides the BBC, do you also watch CNN, Fox, ABC, CBS, etc.? I don't. Anyway, it is my firm opinion that the Western news media and governments have been predominantly pro-Israel, but they are now becoming open to examining the pro-Palestinian side of the conflict. 

[coolcarer]

4 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I'm from the USA. Why would I watch the BBC when I can watch CNN? Besides the BBC, do you also watch CNN, Fox, ABC, CBS, etc.? I don't. Anyway, it is my firm opinion that the Western news media and governments have been predominantly pro-Israel, but they are now becoming open to examining the pro-Palestinian side of the conflict. 

This topic is about accusations against Meta from the BBC

[WDSmart]

11 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

This topic is about accusations against Meta from the BBC

Yes, and in this case, I agree with the BBC, although I don't watch them. My point was, IMO, other Western news media, such as my favorite, CNN, also have initially sided with Israel but are now beginning to be more unbiased.

[coolcarer]

8 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

Yes, and in this case, I agree with the BBC, although I don't watch them. My point was, IMO, other Western news media, such as my favorite, CNN, also have initially sided with Israel but are now beginning to be more unbiased.

No here was you point. You claimed all western media was extremely  bias to pro Israel information sources. Total rubbish

 

2 hours ago, WDSmart said:

All Western news and social media are extremely biased to pro-Israeli information sources. It's only been lately that the pro-Palestinian side of this conflict is being brought to light.  

 

[Chomper Higgot]

13 hours ago, Social Media said:

“We acknowledge we make mistakes, but any implication that we deliberately suppress a particular voice is unequivocally false,” a Meta spokesperson stated.  

Oh so it was a mistake, oooops.

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Oh so it was a mistake, oooops.

 

 

I added a little context for you:

 

13 hours ago, Social Media said:

Meta has denied allegations of deliberate suppression. The company acknowledged implementing "temporary product and policy measures" in October 2023, citing challenges in balancing freedom of speech while addressing the designation of Hamas as a US-sanctioned and dangerous organization under Meta’s policies. “We acknowledge we make mistakes, but any implication that we deliberately suppress a particular voice is unequivocally false,” a Meta spokesperson stated.  

 

[Nick Carter icp]

2 hours ago, WDSmart said:

All Western news and social media are extremely biased to pro-Israeli information sources. It's only been lately that the pro-Palestinian side of this conflict is being brought to light.  

 

   Did you miss the recent investigation where 95 % of media outlets use Hamas's incorrect figures for casualties in the Gaza war ?

   95 % of media outlets publish Hamas's lies about deaths in Gaza .

Just 5 % publish the Israeli figures .

   That shows that 95 % of the media is biased towards Palestine 

[WDSmart]

27 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

No here was you point. You claimed all western media was extremely  bias to pro Israel information sources. Total rubbish

 

2 hours ago, WDSmart said:

All Western news and social media are extremely biased to pro-Israeli information sources. It's only been lately that the pro-Palestinian side of this conflict is being brought to light.  

Okay, how about this? 

All Western news and social media (I watch or interact with) are extremely biased toward pro-Isreali information sources....

[Nick Carter icp]

13 hours ago, Social Media said:

Palestine TV, one of the affected outlets, reported a 60% drop in the visibility of its posts, despite having a substantial following of 5.8 million people. “Interaction was completely restricted, and our posts stopped reaching people,” said journalist Tariq Ziad,

 

   You are the voice of a terror organisation .

You speak on behalf of the people holding babies hostage .

You speak on behalf of rapists and murderers .

You should have your voice curtailed 

[WDSmart]

4 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Did you miss the recent investigation where 95 % of media outlets use Hamas's incorrect figures for casualties in the Gaza war ?

   95 % of media outlets publish Hamas's lies about deaths in Gaza .

Just 5 % publish the Israeli figures .

   That shows that 95 % of the media is biased towards Palestine 

...and 5% of the media outlets publish Israel's lies about deaths in Gaza. 

So, that shows that ALL of the news media is anti-Semitic in one form or another, right?

[coolcarer]

4 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

Okay, how about this? 

All Western news and social media (I watch or interact with) are extremely biased toward pro-Isreali information sources....

The evidence does not back up your opinions

[WDSmart]

Just now, coolcarer said:

The evidence does not back up your opinions

What evidence backs up your or any of our opinions?

[Nick Carter icp]

Just now, WDSmart said:

...and 5% of the media outlets publish Israel's lies about deaths in Gaza. 

So, that shows that ALL of the news media is anti-Semitic in one form or another, right?

 

  Israel gives legitimate figures , figures to the best of their knowledge .

95 % of the media ignore those figures and publish Palestinians nonsense figures instead  

[Chomper Higgot]

12 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Did you miss the recent investigation where 95 % of media outlets use Hamas's incorrect figures for casualties in the Gaza war ?

   95 % of media outlets publish Hamas's lies about deaths in Gaza .

Just 5 % publish the Israeli figures .

   That shows that 95 % of the media is biased towards Palestine 

I missed it.

 

But then I’m always highly suspicious of any quoted percentage without something backing it up.

 
Especially so when the percentages are 90, 95, 99, 99.99 and 100%.

 

 

 

[coolcarer]

4 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

The evidence does not back up your opinions

No it does not back up your opinions. Go to the topic