Meta's decision to lift content restrictions and Replace fact checking software With a system like X's Community Notes being heralded as a massive “win” for freedom of expression by experts.
Dan Schneider, MRC's vice president for Freedom of Expression in America, said that while some critics remain skeptical that reforms to Meta will lead to substantive change, Fox News Digital That First Amendment advocates should take the news as a victory.
“The changes he (Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg) has implemented are systemic and long-term, including replacing some of the most extreme people in Silicon Valley with people like Joel Kaplan and Kevin Martin in the No. 2 and No. 3 positions at the company.” Schneider said. “Change the algorithms. These are huge wins.”
Chief Data and Artificial Intelligence (AI) Officer at UCLA chris mattman, In a conversation with Fox News Digital, Zuckerberg said he should be “applauded” and predicted it would lead to a greater sense of freedom of expression on the 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 the Community Notes system on Elon Musk's X device. (Chris Unger/Zova LLC/Jonathan Ra/NoorPhoto/Andrew Harnick/Getty Images)
“Without Elon (Musk) buying Twitter, renaming it to It happens,” he said.
But not everyone was happy with this news. fact checking organizations, Liberal media pundits and other critics ridiculed the allegations of political bias and suggested that Meta had abdicated her content moderation responsibilities. The New York Times even highlighted fact-checkers who refused to confirm Meta.
“Signals of Trust: Building a Brand in a Post-Truth World”, author Scott Baradel linked Mita's decision to pull the referee from the field and hopes the players will continue to play fair. He told Fox News Digital that it “raises serious questions about whether Big Tech is walking away from their responsibility to balance freedom of expression with the need for public trust in the digital age.”
He added: “Mark Zuckerberg's words are noble — and he's certainly right that there are issues with bias in third-party fact checking — but let's be honest: He's taking the path of least resistance in the wake of Trump's win.” continued.
Executives said Meta's fact-checking program was put in place after the 2016 election, and was used to “moderate content” and misinformation on its platforms, largely due to “political pressures,” but they admitted the system “went overboard.” far.”
META issues sweeping changes to restore freedom of expression on Facebook and Instagram
Social media apps on your iPhone home screen (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutson)
The process has since drawn the ire of conservatives who have accused the platform of politically motivated censorship, while pointing to several examples of content silencing. It includes a startling New York Post report on Hunter Biden's laptop, as well as specific content about COVID-19, which was recently published. Zuckerberg admitted The Biden White House pressured him to do this and it was a mistake.
“We went to independent, third-party fact-checkers,” Joel Kaplan, Meta's chief global affairs officer, told Fox News Digital in an interview Tuesday morning. “It's become clear that there's a lot of political bias in what they choose to fact-check, because, essentially, they have to fact-check everything they see on the platform.”
Mattman, who previously served as CTO at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), said that while there was some credence to accusations of left-wing bias and inaccuracy among fact-checkers, his other takeaway was Zuckerberg's decision to stop downgrading some companies. . Content that has been flagged or rated.
Kaplan told Fox News Digital that Meta will change some of its content moderation rules, especially those that it feels are “too restrictive and don't allow enough discourse on sensitive topics like immigration, transgender issues, and gender.”
Elon Musk praises Zuckerberg's move to end fact-checking on Facebook and Instagram
Meta pads are displayed on a smartphone screen, with the Meta logo visible in the background in Chania, Greece, on August 9, 2024. (Nicholas Kokovelis/Noor Photo via Getty Images)
Kaplan also revealed that Meta currently uses automated systems, which he said makes “a lot of mistakes” and removes content “that doesn't even violate our standards.”
HeraldPR CEO and President Juda S. Engelmayer told Fox News Digital that the problem with Meta and other big tech platforms, whether ongoing or resolved, has been fact-checkers coordinating with platforms to engage in censorship, sometimes based on personal opinions and ideological agendas.
“For example, it should be debated whether the coronavirus originated from a laboratory in China It was never censored “Simply because some found it offensive or politically sensitive.”
“Determining whether the virus is deadly, or whether vaccines and masks are necessary, requires scientific debate and sophisticated data,” Engelmayer continued. “Silencing opposing or supportive viewpoints based on a fact-checker’s perception of what is best for the public undermines free speech.”
The New York Times sparked controversy when it highlighted fact-checkers' objection to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's comments. (New York Times Building image courtesy of CAMERA | Zuckerberg image by Kent Nishimura)
As companies like Meta move to an “open system mentality” and “shed light” on their internal processes, the platforms will get better, Mattmann said. Previously, he was dead Suppress access to content They were rated poorly by fact-checkers or those that included specific keywords.
By moving toward a similar approach to community feedback, Mattman suggested that platform users will see more content, regardless of the “context” provided by fact-checkers, and will have a greater sense of why review decisions are made.
The main contradiction, Mattman stressed, is that community feedback is a “transparent and globally reviewable” approach, where readers can see some discussion about why a piece was flagged and who flagged it.
“The difference between (independent fact-checking organizations) and Community Feedback is that you can review their profiles. People with Community Feedback, like you, can look at the source and say, ‘Okay, this was edited by these people,’ and you can go and look at them on Facebook,” he said. X, as you know and search for that, it's truly the open source mentality that surrounds it, and I think it is at the end what you win. “
However, Mattman said Meta could improve on X's approach by providing more transparency to users.
