Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Meta’s decision to lift content restrictions and replace your fact checking program with a system like X’s Community Notes being heralded as a huge “victory” for freedom of expression by pundits.
While some critics remain skeptical that the reforms in Meta will lead to substantial change, said MRC Free Speech America Vice President Dan Schneider. Fox News Digital that First Amendment advocates should take the news as a victory.
“The changes that (Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg) has implemented are systemic and lasting, including replacing some of the most radical people in Silicon Valley with people like Joel Kaplan and Kevin Martin in the number two and three positions of the corporation.” Schneider said. “Change the algorithms. These are big victories.”
Director of Data and Artificial Intelligence (AI) at UCLA Chris Mattmann, In a conversation with Fox News Digital, he said Zuckerberg should be “applauded” and predicted this would lead to a greater sense of free speech on Meta platforms, which include Facebook, Instagram and Threads.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced Tuesday that his company would 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) buying Twitter, changing the name to election of (Donald) Trump. (This may not have happened),” he said.
But not everyone was excited by the news. Data verification organizations, Liberal media pundits and other critics have scoffed at accusations of political bias and suggested that Meta had abandoned its content moderation responsibilities. The New York Times even highlighted fact-checkers who took issue with Meta’s claim.
“Signs of Trust: Brand Building in a Post-Truth World,” author Scott Baradell compared Meta’s decision to taking a referee off the field and expecting players to continue playing fair. He told Fox News Digital that it “raises serious questions about whether Big Tech is retreating from its responsibility to balance free speech with the need for public trust in the digital age.”
“Mark Zuckerberg’s words are high-sounding, and he is certainly right that there have been issues of bias in third-party fact-checking, but let’s be honest: He is taking the path of least resistance following Trump’s victory,” he said. continued.
Meta’s third-party fact-checking program was implemented after the 2016 election and was used to “manage content” and disinformation on its platforms, largely due to “political pressure,” executives said, but admitted that the system “has gone too far.” far.”
META PROBLEMS BIG CHANGES TO RESTORE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION ON FACEBOOK AND INSTAGRAM
Social media apps on the home screen of an iPhone (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
The process has since drawn the ire of conservatives who have accused the platform of politically motivated censorship and pointed to several examples of muted content. Includes the New York Post’s explosive report on Hunter Biden’s laptop, as well as some content on COVID-19, the latter of which Zuckerberg admitted the Biden White House pressured him to do it and it was a mistake.
“We used independent, third-party fact-checkers,” Meta’s director of global affairs, Joel Kaplan, told Fox News Digital in an interview Tuesday morning. “It has become clear that there is too much political bias in what they choose to verify because they can basically verify everything they see on the platform.”
Mattmann, who previously served as CTO of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), said that while there is some credibility to accusations of leftist bias and inaccuracies among Meta fact-checkers, his other takeaway was Zuckerberg’s decision. to no longer lower certain categories. content that has been flagged or rated.
Kaplan told Fox News Digital that Meta would change some of its own content moderation rules, especially those it considers “too restrictive and don’t allow enough discourse on sensitive topics like immigration, trans issues and gender.”
ELON MUSK APPLAUDS ZUCKERBERG’S MOVE ENDING FACT CHECKING ON FACEBOOK AND INSTAGRAM
Meta platforms are displayed on a smartphone screen and the Meta logo appears 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 says make “too many mistakes” and remove content “that doesn’t even violate our standards.”
HeraldPR CEO and President Juda S. Engelmayer told Fox News Digital that the issue with Meta and other major tech platforms, whether ongoing or resolved, was the coordination of fact-checkers with the platforms to conduct censorship. , sometimes based on personal opinions and ideological agenda.
“For example, the debate over whether the coronavirus originated in a laboratory in China should I have never been censored simply because some considered it offensive or politically sensitive,” he said.
“Determining whether the virus was deadly, or whether vaccines and masks were necessary, involves scientific debate and evolving data. Silencing opposing or supporting views based on a fact-checker’s perception of what is better for the public undermines free speech,” Engelmayer continued.
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 that as companies like Meta adopt a “more open system mentality” and “shed light” on their internal processes, the platforms will improve. Previously, Meta remove content scope poorly rated by fact-checkers or those that included specific keywords.
By moving toward a similar approach to Community Notes, Mattmann suggested that users of the platform will see more content, regardless of the “context” offered by fact-checkers, and will have a better idea of why decisions were made. revision.
The key contrast, Mattmann emphasized, is that Community Notes is a “transparent and globally reviewable” approach, in which readers can see some of the discussion about why a piece was marked and who marked it.
“The difference between (independent fact-checking organizations) and Community Notes is that you can look at their profile. People who have Community Notes, for example, can look at the provenance and say, ‘Okay, this was edited by these people and you can do it. “Go see them on , said.
Still, Mattmann said Meta can improve on X’s approach by providing even more transparency to users.
