What separates harsh criticism from an attack on a group?
The short answer
The issue is now more than the workmanship: the author blames people because of their nationality and urges harm. Facebook’s explanation of hate speech distinguishes attacks on people from arguments about ideas and conduct.
This guide is still under review — details
What this answer is based onWhat to do
Bring the post back to the actual work. Show the defect, state the agreement and describe your attempt to resolve it. Remove the call for violence and the generalisation about nationality.
- Check whether the complaint concerns the tradesperson’s work or everyone of a particular origin.
- Remove calls to cause harm. Do not replace them with hints or emoji carrying the same meaning.
- Keep confirmed facts and your request for a remedy. Nationality does not explain how the tiles were fitted.
The situation
A neighbourhood group discusses a badly tiled bathroom. The author starts with the uneven tiles, then names the tradesperson’s nationality and calls for everyone of that nationality to be beaten. A complaint about one job becomes a call for violence against a group.
The situation and an improvement
A description of a defective repair, followed by a call to beat everyone of the tradesperson’s nationality.
“The tiles are coming away from the wall. These photos show the defect one week after completion. Please arrange an inspection and agree how to fix it.” Only if those are the facts.
One more example
You are condemning someone else’s attack
You want to show that a call for violence appeared in a group. A screenshot without a caption may leave readers unsure whether you support or condemn it.
What to do
Make your position clear immediately: “A call for violence appeared in the group. I condemn it and have reported it.” Often you can summarise without repeating the attack. Context matters, but a caption alone does not make every screenshot acceptable.
What this answer is based on
Meta Community Standards — Hateful Conducttransparency.meta.comFacebook — Hard Questions: Hate Speech (2017)Meta — More Speech and Fewer Mistakes (2025)Full source review pendingReview details
This is a preliminary explanation. We couldn’t read the full source page yet; detailed conditions and exceptions still need checking.
The full current Hateful Conduct policy remains unreviewed. Read Facebook’s 2017 explanation and Meta’s 2025 change announcement; these do not replace current criteria and exceptions.
Include the guide link, language and wording that needs checking. Add an official source link if you have one. Do not send passwords, login codes or photos of identity documents.
Examples are made up to explain the guidance. Meta decides individual account and content cases.
Sources and related topicsPolicy Graph · Demo in development