Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Meta, said on Tuesday that "community notes" will replace third-party fact checkers on Facebook and Instagram in an attempt to counter the notion of bias.
In a Facebook video post announcing the change, Zuckerberg said that fact checkers have been too politically biased and have ruined more trust than they have built. "What began as an effort to promote inclusivity has been misused to silence dissenting voices and exclude those who hold different views, and it has gone too far.
The community notes are likely similar to the process utilized on X, the social media platform that was once known as Twitter. Zuckerberg concurred that the elimination of fact checkers might lead to the spread of certain harmful material.
Related: Did Mark Zuckerberg say the White House pressured Meta over COVID-19 content?
The Evolution of Fact-Checking at Meta: A New Era
Susan Campbell, a well-known lecturer in the Department of Communication, Film, and Media Studies at the University of New Haven, says that Mark Zuckerberg is a well-spoken businessman who can say all the right things, as seen by his several appearances at congressional hearings.
"He and other tech executives have been able to continue making money while poisoning our informational system because to that skill."It's hard to see how taking down the little safeguards that had been in place at Meta is a smart business strategy, but we should also acknowledge that Zuckerberg and the others didn't get to where they are by making poor business choices," she said. "How this could be a smart business decision is beyond me. This is without a doubt the incorrect decision if you want your company to act in the public interest.
Read Also: Is Meta Quest 2 good for seniors?
Meta's Community Notes: A Response to User Demands
The lack of fact checkers, according to Susan Schreiner, a technology industry analyst with C4 Trends, would make the website less safe for the majority of its users.
"Has anyone really thought about the horrors that would follow the declaration of a free-for-all in the name of free speech?"Who is going to be held accountable for any future liabilities? As Schreiner noted. This behavior could be a sign that the pendulum is shifting to the opposite extreme from the more regulated curation used during the outbreak. We'll keep an eye on things.
A request for comment was sent to Meta.
Attempting to win over the incoming administration?
The timing, which occurs only two weeks before President-elect Donald Trump returns to the White House, has been regarded as an effort to win over the new government, since right-wing speakers have been accusing Meta of banning them for the previous four years. Facebook was even implicated in the "steal" of the 2020 election, according to some.
The removal of fact checkers is a big difference from 2021, when the social media site suspended then-President Trump following the Capitol Building rebellion on January 6 and took down a group named "Stop the Steal" for continuing to propagate false information about the election.
"In recent months, Donald Trump has said, 'I consider Facebook to be an enemy of the people,' and threatened Zuckerberg that 'if he does anything illegal this time he will spend the rest of his life in prison,'" according to Rob Lalka, professor at Tulane University's Freeman School of Business and author of The Venture Alchemists: How Big Tech Turned Profits Into Power, referring to the 2024 election.
Must Know: How a business or company could use metaverse in the future?
Assigning Accountability
Strohman also pointed out that by defining "political speech" as something that should never be changed, it might attempt to be a ceasefire or peace offering rather than a business transformation in which a founder is atoning and resolving his historical position.
As he eliminates third-party scrutiny, this will ultimately give people greater authority and autonomy, but it may also create silo areas where only particular points of view are heard, strengthening radical ideologies and dividing society, Strohman continued.
The social media corporations have put in place practices that support those in power in opposition to any attempts at regulation. As the Biden era comes to an end and Trump's second act gets closer, it wouldn't be all that remarkable if Meta changed course again.
"By blaming 'the legacy media' directly and claiming the Biden Administration forced previous censorship, Mark Zuckerberg is trying to reinvent himself for a new era now – the Trump era," Lalka said, citing Elon Musk's firm policies as the direct cause of these changes.
These new changes will likely have long-term implications, even if they might seem advantageous for Meta, at least for the next four years.
Lalka said, "It means that we're going to catch less bad stuff," something that even Zuckerberg acknowledged today. Note to future historians.
Wilman Kala
Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Meta, said on Tuesday that "community notes" will replace third-party fact checkers on Facebook and Instagram in an attempt to counter the notion of bias.
In a Facebook video post announcing the change, Zuckerberg said that fact checkers have been too politically biased and have ruined more trust than they have built. "What began as an effort to promote inclusivity has been misused to silence dissenting voices and exclude those who hold different views, and it has gone too far.
The community notes are likely similar to the process utilized on X, the social media platform that was once known as Twitter. Zuckerberg concurred that the elimination of fact checkers might lead to the spread of certain harmful material.
Related: Did Mark Zuckerberg say the White House pressured Meta over COVID-19 content?
The Evolution of Fact-Checking at Meta: A New Era
Susan Campbell, a well-known lecturer in the Department of Communication, Film, and Media Studies at the University of New Haven, says that Mark Zuckerberg is a well-spoken businessman who can say all the right things, as seen by his several appearances at congressional hearings.
"He and other tech executives have been able to continue making money while poisoning our informational system because to that skill."It's hard to see how taking down the little safeguards that had been in place at Meta is a smart business strategy, but we should also acknowledge that Zuckerberg and the others didn't get to where they are by making poor business choices," she said. "How this could be a smart business decision is beyond me. This is without a doubt the incorrect decision if you want your company to act in the public interest.
Read Also: Is Meta Quest 2 good for seniors?
Meta's Community Notes: A Response to User Demands
The lack of fact checkers, according to Susan Schreiner, a technology industry analyst with C4 Trends, would make the website less safe for the majority of its users.
"Has anyone really thought about the horrors that would follow the declaration of a free-for-all in the name of free speech?"Who is going to be held accountable for any future liabilities? As Schreiner noted. This behavior could be a sign that the pendulum is shifting to the opposite extreme from the more regulated curation used during the outbreak. We'll keep an eye on things.
A request for comment was sent to Meta.
Attempting to win over the incoming administration?
The timing, which occurs only two weeks before President-elect Donald Trump returns to the White House, has been regarded as an effort to win over the new government, since right-wing speakers have been accusing Meta of banning them for the previous four years. Facebook was even implicated in the "steal" of the 2020 election, according to some.
The removal of fact checkers is a big difference from 2021, when the social media site suspended then-President Trump following the Capitol Building rebellion on January 6 and took down a group named "Stop the Steal" for continuing to propagate false information about the election.
"In recent months, Donald Trump has said, 'I consider Facebook to be an enemy of the people,' and threatened Zuckerberg that 'if he does anything illegal this time he will spend the rest of his life in prison,'" according to Rob Lalka, professor at Tulane University's Freeman School of Business and author of The Venture Alchemists: How Big Tech Turned Profits Into Power, referring to the 2024 election.
Must Know: How a business or company could use metaverse in the future?
Assigning Accountability
Strohman also pointed out that by defining "political speech" as something that should never be changed, it might attempt to be a ceasefire or peace offering rather than a business transformation in which a founder is atoning and resolving his historical position.
As he eliminates third-party scrutiny, this will ultimately give people greater authority and autonomy, but it may also create silo areas where only particular points of view are heard, strengthening radical ideologies and dividing society, Strohman continued.
The social media corporations have put in place practices that support those in power in opposition to any attempts at regulation. As the Biden era comes to an end and Trump's second act gets closer, it wouldn't be all that remarkable if Meta changed course again.
"By blaming 'the legacy media' directly and claiming the Biden Administration forced previous censorship, Mark Zuckerberg is trying to reinvent himself for a new era now – the Trump era," Lalka said, citing Elon Musk's firm policies as the direct cause of these changes.
These new changes will likely have long-term implications, even if they might seem advantageous for Meta, at least for the next four years.
Lalka said, "It means that we're going to catch less bad stuff," something that even Zuckerberg acknowledged today. Note to future historians.