While I am sure that's the intention, the claim is that this doesn't happen nearly as aggressively for anti-Arab or anti-Palestine content as it does for anti-Jewish or anti-Israel content, and that there are far more false positives.
In the full report (which is admittedly rather long) it mentions that even many neutral mentions of Hamas are removed, and that comments such as "Make Gaza a parking lot" are allowed to stay, which is obviously not just a suggestion for urban planning, or another that supposedly didn't break the rules was "it will wipe Palestine off the face of the earth and the map", and somehow I don't think that was a cartographer disagreeing on the finer points of map drawing.
I don't think this is intentional; "/Hamas/d" is easier than policing that. But that doesn't change the outcome.
I mean, at some point Instagram was hiding Palestinian flags, and mistranslating things to erroneously inserting "Palestinian terrorist".[1] I am convinced this was not intentional and that this is all hard, but again, it doesn't change the outcome.
And to be honest, this also fits my (unscientific) observations over the last 20 years or so. I've lost count the number of times I've seen "Look what the Jews have accomplished! So much! And the Arabs?! All they're good for is bombs, they never accomplish anything! It's clear the Jewish people are just better than the Arabs"-type stuff, and this is often just left standing. Whereas outright anti-Semitic content is much rarer, and much more promptly removed.
But yes, I would have liked to see some concrete examples.