Bending to the political headwinds of the incoming Trump administration, Facebook and Instagram owner Meta is scrapping its third-party fact-checking program and replacing it with 鈥渃ommunity notes鈥� written by users similar to the model used by .
Announcing the policy shift Tuesday, said the latest election heralded "a cultural tipping point towards once again prioritizing speech.鈥�
The tech giant said expert fact checkers have their own biases and too much content ends up being fact checked, and that it is pivoting to crowdsourcing contributions from users.
鈥淲e鈥檝e seen this approach work on X 鈥� where they empower their community to decide when posts are potentially misleading and need more context,鈥� Meta's Chief Global Affairs Officer Joel Kaplan said in a blog post. He said the new system will be phased in over the coming months.
Meta is among several tech companies apparently before he takes office later this month. Meta and Amazon each donated $1 million to Trump's inauguration fund in December, and Zuckerberg had at the his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida, bringing together the Facebook founder and the former president who was once banned from his social network.
Meta this week appointed Dana White, the president and CEO of Ultimate Fighting Championship and a in Trump鈥檚 orbit, to its board of directors. Kaplan, a former adviser to George W. Bush, was announced as the head of Meta鈥檚 global affairs on Jan. 2.
Meta began fact checks in December 2016 after Donald Trump was elected president for the first time, in response to criticism that 鈥渇ake news鈥� was spreading on its platforms. For years, the tech giant boasted it was working with more than 100 organizations in over 60 languages to combat misinformation.
The Associated Press ended its participation in Meta鈥檚 fact-checking program a year ago.
The tech company said the new system will allow 鈥渕ore speech鈥� by lifting restrictions on discussions of certain mainstream topics, such as immigration and gender, and focus on curbing illegal and 鈥渉igh severity violations," including terrorism, child sexual exploitation and drugs.
Meta said that its approach of building complex systems to manage content on its platforms has "gone too far" and has made 鈥渢oo many mistakes鈥� by censoring too much content.
鈥淢eta is repositioning the company said Emarketer analyst Jasmine Enberg. "The move will elate conservatives, who鈥檝e often criticized Meta for censoring speech, but it will spook many liberals and advertisers, showing just how far Zuckerberg is willing to go to win Trump鈥檚 approval.鈥�
In a shift driven largely by Musk, third-party fact-checking 鈥渉as gone out of fashion among social executives,鈥� Enberg added. "Social platforms have become more political and polarized, as misinformation has become a buzzword that encompasses everything from outright lies to viewpoints people disagree with.鈥�
X's approach to content moderation has led to the loss of some advertisers, but Enberg said Meta鈥檚 鈥渕assive size and powerhouse ad platform insulate it somewhat from an X-like user and advertiser exodus.鈥� Even so, she said, any major drop in user engagement could hurt Meta鈥檚 ad business.
Meta's quasi-independent Oversight Board, which acts as a referee of controversial content decisions, said it welcomes the changes and looks forward to working with the company "to understand the changes in greater detail, ensuring its new approach can be as effective and speech-friendly as possible."
Reaction to Meta's changes fell largely along political lines.
On X, Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio called it a 鈥渉uge step in the right direction.鈥�
Others were skeptical and said the move wasn鈥檛 enough to make them trust Zuckerberg.
鈥淔ool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me,鈥� Rep. Mike Lee of Utah wrote on X. 鈥淐an any of us assume Zuckerberg won鈥檛 return to his old tricks?鈥�
On Trump鈥檚 Truth Social platform, users didn鈥檛 hold back from their ongoing criticism of the Meta CEO, calling him a 鈥渟nake鈥� and 鈥渢he enemy.鈥�
Alexios Mantzarlis, director of the Security, Trust, and Safety Initiative at Cornell Tech and a former director of the International Fact-Checking Network, said the change is 鈥渂y no means perfect, and fact-checkers have no doubt erred in some percentage of their labels.鈥�
He called the change at Meta 鈥渁 choice of politics, not policy,鈥� and warned: "Depending on how this is applied, the consequences of this decision will be an increase in harassment, hate speech and other harmful behavior across billion-user platforms.鈥�
Kelvin Chan, Barbara Ortutay And Nicholas Riccardi, The Associated Press
