Meta’s move to scrap factcheckers is not about “complexity”, as it says (Report, 8 January), but to support Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s agenda.
It is widely agreed that effective, fast and unbiased factchecking is essential for the proper functioning of social media platforms. Similarly, principles of free speech are foundational to fostering communication and public debate in a healthy democratic society. Mark Zuckerberg’s announcement that Meta is to follow X in introducing user-generated notes raises serious concerns.
The shift will intensify pressures on vulnerable groups, including children, minorities, gender rights advocates and LGBTQ+ communities, who are already targeted by hate speech. Additionally, it risks deepening societal polarisation and further fragmenting public discourse.
If Meta truly aspires to be a deliberative space driven by a “global collective consciousness that keeps each other accountable” – as suggested by Linda Yaccarino, the head of X – the company must establish structures that penalise coercion, foster reciprocity and ensure that diverse voices are heard. Moreover, robust systems of accountability must be implemented to ensure credibility and trust.
Meta’s oversight board and previous factchecking system were steps towards enhancing the quality of deliberation. However, it appears that Trump’s agenda is now overriding the vision of individuals such as Noah Feldman, and even Helle Thorning-Schmidt, who have advocated for Meta creating a better society. This regression is not only a disservice to its users, but also a threat to democratic values.
Dr Itziar Castelló
Reader in sustainability and the digital economy, City, University of London
A reasonable precondition of this letter being published is the divulging of my home address to the Guardian. The name you see below is my real name. The Guardian can call me any time to check. You, the reader can also easily verify this. I am not a bot or AI generated.
Surely, if this same precaution was applied to social media enrolment, people would be much less likely to propagate malicious, hateful and mendacious comments behind a cloak of anonymity.
Tony Cima
Winstone, Gloucestershire
How will we know when Facebook stops policing content? I’ve reported ludicrous lies, racist rants and scams (“Like this post and win a Lamborghini”), and fake profiles (“My name is Samantha and I want to be your friend”). Each time, back comes the same message: Sorry, this post does not violate our community standards.
Phil Goddard
Pensacola, Florida, US
