Meta’s Oversight Board Reviews First Threads Case, Reverses Decision on Figurative Death Threat Against Japanese PM

Meta’s Oversight Board has made its first ruling on a Threads case, overturning the company’s decision to remove a post that included a symbolic death threat against Japan’s Prime Minister, Fumio Kishida. The case stemmed from a post criticizing the Prime Minister’s handling of alleged tax evasion within his political party, using the phrase “drop dead / die” in Japanese. The board ruled that the language, while strong, was rhetorical and commonly used in Japanese political discourse and did not constitute a literal call to violence.

The post, which received no engagement, was initially flagged for violating Meta’s Violence and Incitement rules after being reported under the Bullying and Harassment policy. Meta’s human reviewers removed the post, interpreting the phrase as a threat against a high-risk individual, but the user appealed the decision, arguing it was non-literal political criticism. After careful review, the Oversight Board sided with the user, determining that the post was a form of political expression rather than a credible threat.

In its ruling, the Oversight Board emphasized the importance of understanding cultural and linguistic nuances when moderating content, especially in political speech. The board also pointed out the need for Meta to clarify its policies on “death to” phrases, recommending more precise guidelines on handling rhetorical threats versus real ones, mainly when directed at public figures and heads of state.

The case is notable for being the first Threads-related review and its implications for how Meta handles political speech across its platforms. It comes amid broader conversations about freedom of expression, moderation, and political content on social media. Meta’s decision to not actively recommend political content on Threads adds further complexity to how the platform handles such cases moving forward.

This ruling highlights Meta’s ongoing efforts to balance political expression with safety and moderation. The board’s recommendations will likely shape future political speech policies, especially in culturally sensitive contexts.