Meta’s decision to scrap fact-checking system and adopt Musk-like policy is big ‘victory’ for free speech: experts
Meta’s decision to lift content restrictions i replace your fact-checking program with a system like X’s Community Notes experts herald it as a major “victory” for free speech.
While some critics remain skeptical that Meta’s reforms will lead to significant change, MRC Free Speech America Vice President Dan Schneider told Fox News Digital that First Amendment advocates should take this news as a victory.
“Changes [Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg] that he implemented are systematic, long-term, including replacing some of the most radical people in Silicon Valley with people like Joel Kaplan and Kevin Martin in the second and third place in the corporation,” Schneider said. “Algorithm change. These are big wins.”
UCLA Chief Data and Artificial Intelligence (AI) Officer. Chris Mattmann, speaking to Fox News Digital, he said Zuckerberg should be “applauded” and predicted it would lead to a greater sense of free expression on Meta platforms, which include Facebook, Instagram and Threads.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced Tuesday that his company will adopt a new fact-checking system similar to Elon Musk’s X Community Notes. (Chris Unger/Zuffa LLC/Jonathan Raa/NurPhoto/Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
“Without Elon [Musk] buy Twitter, rename it X and immediately fire all the Trust & Safety people and all those who did that kind of ‘independent fact-checking’ – without it, and probably with [Donald] Trump’s election [this may not have happened]”, he said.
But not everyone was delighted with the news. Fact-checking organizations, liberal media pundits and other critics derided claims of political bias and suggested that Meta had abdicated its content moderation responsibilities. The New York Times even singled out fact-checkers who disputed Meta’s claim.
“Trust Signals: Building a Brand in a Post-Truth World,” author Scott Baradell equated Meta’s decision to the referee’s removal from the field and the hope that the players would continue to play fair. He told Fox News Digital that it “raises serious questions about whether Big Tech is shirking its responsibility to strike a balance between free speech and the need for public trust in the digital age.”
“Mark Zuckerberg’s words are high-minded — and he’s certainly right that there have been problems with third-party fact-checking bias — but let’s face it: He’s taking the path of least resistance after Trump’s victory,” he said. continued.
Meta’s third-party fact-checking program was introduced after the 2016 election and has been used to “manage content” and misinformation on its platforms, largely due to “political pressure,” executives said, but acknowledged that the system “has gone too far.”
META PROBLEMS BIG CHANGES TO RESTORE FREEDOM OF SPEECH ON FACEBOOK, INSTAGRAM
Social media apps on the iPhone home screen (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
Since then, the process has drawn the ire of conservatives who have accused the platform of politically motivated censorship, pointing to several examples of content being glossed over. Includes the New York Post’s bombastic coverage of Hunter Biden’s laptop, as well as some content about COVID-19, the latter of which Zuckerberg admitted Biden’s White House pressured him to do it, and it was a mistake.
“We went to independent, third-party fact-checkers,” the Meta’s chief global affairs officer, Joel Kaplan, said in an interview with Fox News Digital on Tuesday morning. “It became clear that there is too much political bias in what they decide to fact-check because, basically, they have to fact-check everything they see on the platform.”
Mattmann, who previously served as technical director of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), said that while there is some credence to allegations of left-wing bias and inaccuracies among Meta’s fact-checkers, his second takeaway was Zuckerberg’s decision to no longer downgrade certain content that has been flagged or rated.
Kaplan told Fox News Digital that Meta will change some of its own content moderation rules, particularly those it feels are “too restrictive and don’t allow enough discourse on sensitive topics like immigration, trans issues and gender.”
ELON MUSK WELCOME ZUCKERBERG’S MOVE TO END FACT CHECK ON FACEBOOK AND INSTAGRAM
Meta platforms are displayed on a smartphone screen with the Meta logo appearing in the background in Chania, Greece, on August 9, 2024. (Nikolas Kokovlis/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Kaplan also revealed that Meta currently uses automated systems, which he said make “too many mistakes” and remove content “that doesn’t even violate our standards.”
HeraldPR CEO and President Judah S. Engelmayer told Fox News Digital that the problem with Meta and other major tech platforms, whether ongoing or resolved, is the coordination of fact-checkers with the platforms to engage in censorship, sometimes based on personal opinions and ideological plan.
“For example, the debate about whether the coronavirus originated from a laboratory in China should they were never censored simply because some found it offensive or politically sensitive,” she said.
“Determining whether the virus was deadly or whether vaccines and masks were necessary involves scientific debate and evolving data. Silencing opposing or supporting viewpoints based on a fact-checker’s perception of what is best for the public undermines free discourse,” he continued. Engelmayer.
The New York Times sparked controversy when it highlighted fact-checkers taking issue with Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s comments. (New York Times Building photo courtesy of CAMERA | Zuckerberg photo by Kent Nishimura)
Mattmann said the platforms will only get better as companies like Meta move to an “open system mentality” and “shed light” on their internal processes. Previously, Meta would suppress content reach rated poorly by fact checkers or those that included certain keywords.
By moving toward an approach similar to Community Notes, Mattmann suggested that users of the platform will see more content, regardless of the “context” provided by fact-checkers, and have a better sense of why review decisions were made.
The key contrast, Mattmann noted, is that Community Notes is a “globally reviewed, transparent” approach, where readers can see some of the discussion about why an article was flagged and who flagged it.
“The difference between [independent fact-checking organizations] and Community Notes you can view their profile. People who have Community Notes, like you can look at the provenance and say, OK, this was edited by these people and you can look at X, you know, and look it up. So it’s really an open source mentality around it. And that, I think, actually wins in the end,” he said.
Still, Mattmann said Meta can improve X’s approach by bringing even more transparency to users.
