Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced last week that the social media giant is ending its third-party fact-checking program and replacing it with a community-driven system modeled after the community notes feature on Elon Musk’s X.
Meta’s decision to dismantle its extensive fact-checking activity in the U.S. and to end a program that was designed to limit the spread of hate and misinformation on its platform is not good news. And the plan to allow virtual free rein to posters and to rely on other posters to add context or debunk claims in notes that appear next to specific posts promises to do very little to control the flow of hate, bias, prejudice, targeting, and potential incitement to violence on Meta’s multiple social media platforms.
Zuckerberg’s move from a champion of truth, accuracy and curated fairness to a proponent of “uncensored, free expression” is consistent with other things Zuckerberg has done in response to threats and pressure from President-elect Donald Trump and his band of conservative warriors. Zuckerberg chose capitulation rather than confrontation as he tries to ingratiate himself to the incoming administration.
Zuckerberg’s public path to submission is clear. He joined Trump for dinner last November at Mar-a-Lago. In December, he donated $1 million to Trump’s inauguration committee. Two weeks ago, he named Joel Kaplan, a Trump-connected Republican with significant Washington experience, as Meta’s chief global affairs officer. And last week, he named Dana White, a Trump sidekick and president of the Ultimate Fighting Championship, to Meta’s board of directors.
While Zuckerberg’s strategy of surrender may help Meta avoid regulatory struggles in the new administration, there are consequences to the decision to abandon third-party fact-checking on Facebook, Instagram and Threads. Among the most significant concerns is online protection against antisemitism and other forms of bias and hatred.
In his announcement, Zuckerberg acknowledged that the changes he is making are a “trade-off” that will allow more “bad stuff” to circulate on Meta’s platforms. But he claimed that the move is necessary in response to “a cultural tipping point” resulting from Trump’s election. So now, with culture “tipped,” Zuckerberg joins Trump in expressing concern that third-party fact-checking of public statements and efforts to assure honesty and accuracy in public postings are an impediment to free speech.
Reactions to Zuckerberg’s announcement were predictable: praise from conservative leaders and pundits and condemnation from an array of consumer, civil rights and watchdog organizations.
But for the Jewish community and those concerned about unchecked Jew-hatred on social media, the Zuckerberg announcement is particularly upsetting. Although Meta’s third-party monitoring was not entirely successful in stopping misinformation, bias and prejudice, it did provide some degree of restraint from deliberate misinformation campaigns and other deceitful activity. But now, with the exception of what Meta calls “high severity violations” like terrorism, child sexual exploitation, drugs, and scams, the social media giant will not take action to independently enforce its policies against unfiltered postings by participants.
We join those who are concerned that the removal of protections and reasonable guidelines for postings on social media will open the sewer of hatred and prejudice that could fuel very real threats to Jewish communities and individuals. That is not a victory for free speech.
