Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg triggered alarm Tuesday when he announced the Palo Alto company was ditching third-party fact-checking in the United States and turning over the task of debunking falsehoods to ordinary users under a model known as "Community Notes," popularized by X.
The decision was widely seen as an attempt to appease President-elect Donald Trump, whose conservative support base has long complained that fact-checking on tech platforms was a way to curtail free speech and censor right-wing content.
"I think it's really shameful," Biden told reporters at the White House when asked about the announcement.
"Telling the truth matters," he said, adding that the move was "completely contrary to everything America's about."
The International Fact-Checking Network has warned of devastating consequences if Meta broadens its policy shift beyond US borders to the company's programs covering more than 100 countries.
"Some of these countries are highly vulnerable to misinformation that spurs political instability, election interference, mob violence and even genocide," IFCN, which includes AFP among dozens of its global member organizations, said in an open letter to Zuckerberg.
"If Meta decides to stop the program worldwide, it is almost certain to result in real-world harm in many places," it added.
Zuckerberg doubled down in an interview Friday with podcaster Joe Rogan, comparing the fact-checking program with "something out of 1984," in a reference to George Orwell's dystopian novel.
He added that the program, which began in 2016, was "destroying so much trust, especially in the United States."
Zuckerberg also expressed regret for giving "too much deference" to the traditional media, criticizing it for pushing the narrative that social media misinformation had swung the 2016 election in favor of Trump.
- 'Consequences' -
Zuckerberg stunned many when he said on Tuesday that fact-checkers were "too politically biased," and added that the program had led to "too much censorship."
IFCN's letter rejected the claim as "false," insisting that Meta's fact-checking partners underwent "rigorous" verification to meet its strict nonpartisanship standards.
Far from questioning those standards, it added, Meta had "consistently praised their rigor and effectiveness."
The United Nations rights chief Volker Turk also insisted on Friday that regulating harmful content and hate speech online "is not censorship."
Allowing such content to flourish online has "real-world consequences," Turk said on X.
Brazil on Friday gave Meta 72 hours to explain its fact-checking policy for the country, and how it plans to protect "fundamental rights" on its platforms.
Attorney General Jorge Messias told journalists his office could take "legal and judicial" measures against Meta if it does not respond in time to an extrajudicial notice filed Friday.
Facebook currently pays to use fact checks from around 80 organizations globally on the platform, as well as on WhatsApp and Instagram.
AFP currently works in 26 languages with Facebook's fact-checking scheme.
- 'Trigger towards violence' -
"Understandably this policy from Meta is aimed at US users, but we cannot be certain how it will affect other countries," Supinya Klangnarong, co-founder of Thai fact-checking platform Cofact, told AFP.
"By allowing the proliferation of hate speech and racist dialogue could be a trigger towards violence."
Cofact is not an accredited member of the IFCN or of Facebook's fact-checking scheme.
Fears over a possible spike in hate speech have grown as Meta also rolled back restrictions around topics such as gender and sexual identity.
The latest version of Meta's community guidelines said its platforms would now permit users to accuse people of "mental illness or abnormality" based on their gender or sexual orientation.
Meta's policy overhaul came less than two weeks before Trump takes office.
Trump has been a harsh critic of Meta and Zuckerberg for years, accusing the company of bias against him and threatening to retaliate against the tech billionaire once back in office.
Regulating online hate speech 'not censorship': UN rights chief
Geneva (AFP) Jan 10, 2025 -
The UN rights chief insisted Friday that regulating hate speech and harmful content online "is not censorship", days after Meta scrapped its fact-checking programme on Facebook and Instagram citing censorship concerns.
"Allowing hate speech and harmful content online has real world consequences. Regulating such content is not censorship," Volker Turk said on X.
"My Office calls for accountability and governance in the digital space, in line with human rights."
Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg announced Tuesday the group would "get rid of fact-checkers" and replace them with community-based posts, starting in the United States, complaining the programme had made "too many mistakes and too much censorship".
Instead, Meta platforms including Facebook and Instagram, "would use community notes similar to X (formerly Twitter), starting in the US," he added.
Meta's surprise announcement echoed long-standing complaints by Trump's Republican Party and X owner Elon Musk about fact-checking, which many conservatives see as censorship.
Facebook currently pays to use fact checks from around 80 organisations globally on the platform, as well as on WhatsApp and Instagram.
AFP currently works in 26 languages with Facebook's fact-checking scheme.
- 'Silenced' -
Without mentioning Meta or X, Turk elaborated on his comments on LinkedIn, cautioning that social media had the "demonstrated ability to fuel conflict, incite hatred and threaten safety".
"When at its best, social media is a place where people with divergent views can exchange, if not always agree," he said.
However, he said, "when we call efforts to create safe online spaces 'censorship', we ignore the fact that unregulated space means some people are silenced - in particular those whose voices are often marginalised".
"At the same time, allowing hatred online limits free expression and may result in real world harms."
Turk said "freedom of expression thrives when diverse voices can be heard without enabling harm or disinformation".
Accountability and governance in digital spaces, he said, "safeguards public discourse, builds trust, and protects the dignity of all".
Asked about whether the UN might reevaluate its presence on Meta and X, UN spokesman Michele Zaccheo said the organisation was "constantly watching this space and evaluating it".
"There is no doubt that on a number of social media platforms there is a lot of hate speech, which we have been very vocal about", he told reporters, adding that UN agencies had been victims of "misinformation campaigns and disinformation campaigns".
But for now, he said, "it's important for us to be present with fact-based information".
World Health Organization spokeswoman Margaret Harris agreed.
"Our role is to provide good science-based health information, and we need to provide that wherever people are looking for it," she told reporters.
"So we will (be) across all platforms, whenever possible."
Related Links
Democracy in the 21st century at TerraDaily.com
| Subscribe Free To Our Daily Newsletters |
| Subscribe Free To Our Daily Newsletters |
