• Meta ends its partnership with U.S. third-party fact-checkers, replacing it with a “Community Notes” system to address concerns about political bias.
  • Fact-checkers, including U.K.-based Full Fact, criticize the move, warning it may worsen the spread of misinformation globally.
  • Critics argue Meta’s decision could weaken global collaboration against misinformation, while Meta claims the shift promotes free speech and transparency.

In a controversial move, Meta, Facebook’s parent company, announced it is ending its partnership with third-party fact-checkers in the United States. This decision, made public on Tuesday, has drawn sharp criticism from fact-checking organizations, including the U.K.-based Full Fact. The organization labeled the move a “backward step” that could have global consequences for combating misinformation.

A Shift to “Community Notes”

Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s CEO, revealed that the company plans to replace fact-checking partnerships with a “Community Notes” system, similar to Elon Musk’s approach on the social network X. Zuckerberg justified the decision by claiming that U.S.-based fact-checkers have been “too politically biased,” which, according to him, eroded public trust. He stated, “The fact-checkers have destroyed more trust than they’ve created. Over the next few months, we’ll phase in a more comprehensive community note system.”

This announcement comes after President-elect Donald Trump’s 2024 victory. Since the election, Zuckerberg has taken steps to align closer to the incoming administration, including donating $1 million to Trump’s inaugural fund and hiring allies like Dana White to Meta’s board.

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10

MORE NEWS: Beef Prices Hit Record Highs as Parasite Closes Border

Fact-Checkers Push Back

Full Fact’s CEO, Chris Morris, criticized Meta’s decision, emphasizing the crucial role fact-checkers play in maintaining credible online information. In a strongly worded statement, Morris called fact-checkers the “first responders” of the digital information space. He highlighted their focus on evidence-based practices to tackle harmful misinformation, adding, “The public has a right to access our expertise.”

Full Fact, which partnered with Meta since 2019, claimed the move could create ripple effects worldwide. “While we’re impartial and fact-check all claims equally, locking us out won’t help turn the tide on misinformation,” Morris said. The organization, which received more than $3.1 million from Meta between 2019 and 2023, worries this decision will embolden bad actors seeking to spread false claims.

Implications for Global Fact-Checking

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE THE DUPREE REPORT

Do you think President Trump should have won the Nobel Peace Prize?

By completing the poll, you agree to receive emails from The Dupree Report, occasional offers from our partners and that you've read and agree to our privacy policy and legal statement.

European fact-checkers are closely monitoring this development, concerned about its potential impact on the global fight against misinformation. Full Fact noted that the borderless nature of misinformation requires collective effort, and Meta’s decision could hinder international collaboration.

While Meta argues that the new system will promote free speech and transparency, critics fear it could leave digital platforms more vulnerable to manipulation. The shift also raises questions about the ethical responsibility tech giants hold in curbing misinformation.

Meta’s decision has sparked a wide range of opinions. What do you think about the end of third-party fact-checking partnerships? Join the conversation and share your perspective in the comments below.

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10