**Rights Organizations Raise Alarm Over Meta’s Reversal of Hate Speech Policies**
Advocacy groups are expressing alarm regarding Meta’s recent choice to ease restrictions on discriminatory and hateful speech across its platforms. Detractors claim this action not only jeopardizes years of advancements in online safety but may also be an attempt to win over the upcoming presidential administration.
This policy change cancels long-standing guidelines that identified language viewed as dehumanizing or derogatory. In the past, Meta prohibited content that likened protected characteristics — such as “race, ethnicity, national origin, disability, religious affiliation, caste, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity, and serious disease” — to inanimate objects, waste, or illnesses. These safeguards are now being diminished, raising alarms about a potential increase in online aggression.
In a particularly alarming turn for LGBTQ+ users, Meta will discontinue flagging posts that promote discrimination based on gender or sexual orientation. The company’s rationale for this adjustment includes references to outdated language, asserting: “We do allow allegations of mental illness or abnormality when based on gender or sexual orientation, given political and religious discourse about transgenderism and homosexuality and common non-serious usage of words like ‘weird.'”
### **SEE ALSO:**
[Instagram blocked LGBTQ+ content by mistake, claims Meta](https://mashable.com/article/instagram-blocked-lgbtq-content)
In a statement to CNN, a Meta representative affirmed that the company will still prohibit identity-based slurs, targeted harassment, and threats of violence. Nevertheless, rights organizations express profound concern.
“Zuckerberg’s elimination of fact-checking programs and industry-standard hate speech policies makes Meta’s platforms dangerous for users and advertisers alike,” stated Sarah Kate Ellis, President and CEO of GLAAD, in an [official statement](https://www.instagram.com/p/DEioTI_xTln/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==). “Without these crucial policies, Meta is paving the way for individuals to target LGBTQ individuals, women, immigrants, and other marginalized populations with aggression, hostility, and dehumanizing narratives. Meta is normalizing anti-LGBTQ animosity for profit — at the cost of its users and true freedom of expression.”
GLAAD’s annual Social Media Safety Index had already indicated that Meta was not doing enough to safeguard LGBTQ+ users from online hate. The rollback of hate speech regulations only adds to these worries.
The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) also condemned the policy modifications, labeling them a threat to human rights and free expression. “Meta’s updates to its policies regarding gender and immigration content are alarmingly vague and could permit more transphobic and xenophobic content,” remarked Kate Ruane, director of CDT’s Free Expression Project. “Although legal, such content will certainly discourage the speech of individuals in these communities.”
Imran Ahmed, CEO of the Center for Countering Digital Hate, voiced similar concerns in a [statement to CNN](https://edition.cnn.com/2025/01/07/us/video/meta-to-get-rid-of-fact-checkers-on-facebook-instagram). “This will generate a deluge of unchecked misinformation — exacerbating the spread of hate, jeopardizing the integrity of our communities, our democracy, and potentially endangering public health and our children,” Ahmed cautioned.
### **Internal Worries from Meta Staff**
Even inside Meta, the policy alteration has triggered unease. Discussions with 10 current and former employees conducted by [Platformer](https://www.platformer.news/meta-fact-checking-free-speech-surrender/) uncovered internal dissent. One former Trust and Safety employee, remaining anonymous, voiced panic: “I can’t emphasize how much damage arises from non-illegal yet harmful content. This is degrading, dreadful content that leads to violence and has the intent to harm others.”
One employee went so far as to characterize the changes as a prelude to genocide. Facebook, a platform owned by Meta, has previously faced allegations from organizations such as [Amnesty International](https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/myanmar-facebooks-systems-promoted-violence-against-rohingya-meta-owes-reparations-new-report/) of fostering hate speech that incited violence against the Rohingya in Myanmar, resulting in mass atrocities.
### **A Wider Shift in Content Moderation**
Meta’s overhaul of its Hateful Conduct policy coincides with another controversial move: the [termination of its fact-checking program](https://mashable.com/article/meta-ditches-fact-checking-for-community-notes) in favor of expanded Community Notes. Critics argue this decision further diminishes the platform’s capability to combat misinformation and hate speech.
A recent report from User Mag highlighted more moderation shortcomings, including Instagram’s unintentional blocking of posts utilizing [LGBTQ-related hashtags](https://mashable.com/article/instagram-blocked-lgbtq-content), which were flagged as violating