Meta and CEO Mark Zuckerberg are facing criticism over the decision to remove fact-checking and adopt a Community Notes-style system for moderation. Zuckerberg recently addressed the move on Threads, offering insights into the company’s strategy and expectations for the change.
Zuckerberg’s explanation highlights why Meta is making this shift, though some omissions in his remarks raise further questions.
A Change in Direction
According to Zuckerberg, people now want to see more political content in their Facebook and Instagram feeds, marking a reversal of Meta’s previous stance. He claims users are interested in discussing civic topics and engaging with mainstream political arguments.
This approach contrasts sharply with Meta’s earlier messaging. In 2021, Zuckerberg emphasized reducing political content, citing user feedback against it. Meta even framed its earlier decision as a way to improve user experience and avoid divisive debates.
At the time, Meta also noted that political content and news weren’t major drivers of engagement. News-related posts reportedly made up only 3% of activity on Facebook and even less on Instagram. Instead, Meta turned its focus to AI-driven recommendations, like promoting Reels, which significantly boosted user engagement.
What’s Behind the Shift?
Zuckerberg suggests that the recent U.S. election marked a cultural turning point, leading users to prioritize free expression. He argues that stepping back from strict moderation aligns with user preferences for fewer restrictions on their opinions.
However, this shift comes at a critical moment. The return of politically polarizing figures, coupled with a landscape filled with misinformation risks, makes fact-checking more relevant than ever. Critics question why Meta would loosen its grip on content moderation now, especially after years of defending its cautious approach.
Zuckerberg also pointed out that aggressive content takedowns affect millions of users. While reducing moderation errors might improve user experience, critics argue it could lead to greater exposure to harmful or misleading content.
Community Notes: A Flawed Model?
Meta plans to introduce a Community Notes system, similar to X’s model, to add context to posts. Zuckerberg believes this system will offer broader coverage than traditional fact-checking.
While the concept has potential, evidence suggests Community Notes alone may not suffice. On X, the system requires bipartisan agreement before a note is displayed. This can stall action on divisive topics, especially where political bias influences decision-making. Reports also indicate that organized groups have manipulated Community Notes to suppress certain views.
At Meta’s scale, these issues could escalate, making it unclear why the company is fully embracing this approach rather than using it as a supplemental tool.
Implications for Publishers
On a positive note, Meta’s renewed focus on civic content could benefit publishers. Zuckerberg says the changes will increase the reach of such content, potentially driving more referral traffic. For many publishers, who have seen Facebook traffic dry up, this could provide a much-needed boost.
A Puzzling Decision
Meta’s sudden pivot raises more questions than answers. After years of scaling back political content, citing both user preference and business concerns, the company is now heading in the opposite direction.
Critics speculate that regulatory pressure may have influenced this change. Despite Zuckerberg’s emphasis on user feedback, some see this as a strategic move to align with political forces rather than a genuine response to audience demand.
