Mark Zuckerberg’s decision to end Meta’s fact-checking programme in the United States has sent shockwaves around the world. From the UN to the Council of Europe, and including US President Joe Biden, the reactions have been overwhelming, condemning the decision as a dangerous one.
A U-turn in the fight against disinformation
Meta’s about-turn marks a turning point in the history of content moderation on social networks. For nearly ten years, the fact-checking programme had been working with more than 80 organisations around the world, verifying information in more than 60 languages. To justify this change, Zuckerberg cited a political bias among fact-checkers and a form of censorship that he wanted to correct.
In an interview with Joe Rogan’s podcast, the Meta CEO explained that he had ‘given too much credit’ to the media for attributing Trump’s election in 2016 to disinformation. He is now proposing to replace the system with ‘community ratings’, similar to those used on X, allowing users to add their own context to publications.
Internationally: between vigilance and concern
The International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN), which brings together more than 130 organisations including AFP, has firmly rejected Meta’s arguments. In an open letter, the IFCN described Zuckerberg’s reasoning as ‘questionable’ and warned of the potentially worrying consequences of this decision, particularly in countries ‘vulnerable to misinformation that could cause political instability’.
President Biden described the decision as ‘truly shameful’, while the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights pointed out that regulating online hate content ‘is not censorship’. The Council of Europe stresses the risks of ‘negative consequences for human rights’.
While Meta’s decision currently only concerns the United States, its impact is also being observed in Europe, where the authorities are closely monitoring this development. Clara Chappaz, French Minister for Digital Affairs, said she had received assurances from Meta France that the fact-checking programme would be maintained in Europe, in accordance with the provisions of the Digital Services Act (DSA). However, the reference to the guarantee being valid ‘for the time being’ raises questions about the company’s long-term intentions.
J’ai echangé avec la direction de Meta France ce soir qui m’assure que cette fonctionnalité ne sera déployée qu’aux Etats-Unis pour le moment. En Europe, le Digital Service Act sera respecté. Croyez en ma vigilance sur le sujet. https://t.co/EWOnqxCnbt
— Clara Chappaz (@ClaraChappaz) January 7, 2025
These developments could accentuate the divergence between two approaches to regulating online content: a Europe that favours professional, regulated supervision, and an American model that relies on self-regulation by users. Such a divide could have significant implications for information management on a global scale and for the ability of platforms to guarantee a reliable digital environment.
The fact-checking ecosystem redefined and constantly evolving
For the fact-checking community, this decision also marks a turning point. Meta’s fact-checking programme, which paid more than 80 media organisations around the world, represented a major economic pillar for this still young profession. Agence France-Presse, for example, participates in this programme in more than 26 languages.
The replacement of professionals by ‘community notes’ raises fundamental questions about the future of the profession. Aaron Sharockman, director of PolitiFact, points out that the work of fact-checkers is not limited to saying whether a piece of information is true or false, but consists of ‘providing additional context and content’ through rigorous journalistic work.
‘If your toilet leaked, you wouldn’t rely on the first person you met to fix it,’ points out Michael Wagner, professor at the University of Wisconsin’s School of Journalism and Mass Communication. This analogy underlines the importance of professional expertise in verifying information, a skill that ‘community ratings’ apparently cannot entirely replace.
The transformation of fact-checking is therefore not limited to a simple change of method. It calls into question an entire economic and professional model that has been built up over recent years around the fight against disinformation. At a time when the need to verify information has never been greater, particularly with the emergence of AI, an entire sector is having to rethink its future and its business model.
Advertisers faced with a strategic choice
The abandonment of fact-checking by Meta in the United States raises a number of economic issues, particularly in the advertising sector. According to Jasmine Enberg, an analyst at eMarketer, this development ‘could put off many advertisers’ who are already sensitive to the environment in which their ads appear. The potential proximity between advertising content and unverified information is a point of concern for brands.
This situation echoes the events on X, where a change in moderation policy led to a temporary suspension of advertising investment by certain companies. The current context means that brands are particularly vigilant about the environment in which their messages are broadcast.
From a financial point of view, this decision raises a number of issues for Meta, whose business model is based 98% on advertising revenue. A change in advertisers’ investment strategies could have implications for the company’s results.
Advertisers have several alternatives for their advertising investments, including professional platforms such as LinkedIn and other traditional media. Influencer marketing is also an option that allows greater control over the distribution environment.
This development raises questions about the balance between the commercial objectives of social platforms and their content management methods. Meta’s decision could influence future practices in the advertising and marketing sector.
The role of the consultant in the face of these transformations
The role of the consultant is evolving in the face of these regular changes. The support offered by agencies is taking on a more strategic dimension, requiring the ability to adapt quickly to the constant changes in the sector.
This dynamic of change is redefining day-to-day operations. Expertise in social media, marketing and moderation extends beyond the technical aspects to include an understanding of regulatory issues. This global vision makes it possible to anticipate changes in platform policies and adjust customer strategies accordingly.
Faced with platforms that can be inflexible, consultants need to identify and deploy solutions tailored to the specific objectives of each customer.
Faced with these constant changes, a number of questions emerge: how can agencies and their consultants anticipate changes in platforms, or how can they preserve a brand’s image in an environment where cooperation with platforms seems to be diminishing? The challenge is to adapt methods in an agile way to take advantage of these constant changes.
By Rachel Sellem
Sources :
