Meta is restricting the use of the upside-down red triangle emoji, a reference to Hamas combat operations that has become a broader symbol of Palestinian resistance, on its Facebook and Instagram, and WhatsApp platforms, according to internal content moderation materials reviewed by The Intercept.

Since the beginning of the Israeli assault on Gaza, Hamas has regularly released footage of its successful strikes on Israeli military positions with red triangles superimposed above targeted soldiers and armor. Since last fall, use of the red triangle emoji has expanded online, becoming a widely used icon for people expressing pro-Palestinian or anti-Israeli sentiment. Social media users have included the shape in their posts, usernames, and profiles as a badge of solidarity and protest.

The symbol has become common enough that the Israeli military has used it as shorthand in its own propaganda: In November, Al Jazeera reported on an Israeli military video that warned “Our triangle is stronger than yours, Abu Obeida,” addressing Hamas’s spokesperson.

  • cygnus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m certainly not going to defend anything Israel is doing here. Both sides in this debacle are bloodthirsty maniacs.

    • MetaCubed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Sorry, i dont want to be rude, but do you actually have any arguments other than gesturing at the article & giving both-sides-isms?

      Hamas has committed war crimes, yes, however it shouldn’t be ignored that Israel is currently engaged in terrorism, genocide, land grabs, torture of prisoners and more. Simply saying “both sides bad” lays the blame more evenly than it should be laid.

      • cygnus@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Sorry, i dont want to be rude, but do you actually have any arguments other than gesturing at the article & giving both-sides-isms?

        Since this thread is about the article, no, I don’t.