Thoughts on the New Meta Policies for Fact Checking

With the recent news from Meta that they will remove fact checking on their platforms, there is a lot of confusion and concerns – but also a lot of happy users – about what this means for Facebook and Instagram.

Below are my thoughts on the initial, and potentially long-term impacts of these changes. You may not agree with my thoughts - and that's ok! Big changes to platforms like this will always result in differing opinions. These are my thoughts - as of today. With time, maybe we see an evolution in these policies, we'll adapt to the new experience, and maybe it's better, maybe it's worse. But right now, we don't know what's going to happen in the long run.

That said, here are some of my thoughts on what the news from Zuckerberg means for us:

⚠️Meta is at the mercy of US government. They bowed to the Biden administration regarding covid information and now they are bowing to the Trump administration for free speech. This will inevitably continue in perpetuity, with whatever administration is in office. It's a business move - it keeps the platforms operational while minimizing the challenges from the US government

⚠️Without fact checkers, expect a plethora of obnoxiously fake information. We're already seeing satire saying Mark Zuckerberg is dead at 36, Mark Zuckerberg is the first recipient of a rat penis transfer. Yes, these are satire, highlighting the issues of no fact-checking, but the "freedom" to post anything will be taken advantage of in the early transition.

✅Community notes will allow users to flag content as inaccurate or false. If you read something that is inaccurate, you can post a note with clarifying information for others to see.

⚠️These community notes are not moderated. So you can post something factual, someone can disagree with you and post a note claiming it's not true. There's also no apparent moderation to mitigate bullying, language, or inappropriate behavior.

✅Less filters mean less unintended flagging for your content. As brands and creators, this could and should be helpful, ensuring your content gets flagged less often and provide more opportunity for reach and distribution.

⚠️I'm not saying their filters were accurate, and yes, AI or tech filters often got it wrong. But relying on a broad audience, often uneducated in specific topics, to make determination of accuracy is going to cause MORE errors and issues.

⚠️Zuck has taken a stand as a US company. He called out multiple countries and regions for their "censorship" and lack of innovation. Meta platforms are global. They have been pushing for global usage and global policy adoption for years. But now... all we hear is a USA chant. I'm not sure what the implications of this will mean in both the short and long-term, but it will get messy.

⚠️Stereotypes will perpetuate the location of the policy teams. Meta is moving the Moderation and Trust teams out of California (often associated with very liberal views) to Texas (often associated with very republican views) in an effort to remove the perceived bias of their teams. Look, if it's the same people on the team, it doesn't matter where they work/live. If they are new employees on the teams, why pick one of the most polar opposite states? Why not pick a neutral state without prejudice for one political party or another? Because it's not about neutrality. Also, that said, not everyone in California is an extreme Democrat and not everyone in Texas is an extreme Republican.

In the grand scheme, I think it's going to get messy. I think we'll see a lot of confusion, a lot of misinformation, a lot of people testing and taking advantage. For a while. Then it'll settle down. And policies will shift again. And users will adapt. And it'll get better. So, be patient, give it some time, and be the good on the platforms.