Meta Scraps Fact-Checking in Major Content Moderation Overhaul

Meta will discontinue its long-standing use of fact-checking organizations across its platforms, founder Mark Zuckerberg announced this week. The social media giant will instead implement a community notes system similar to X (formerly Twitter), allowing users to identify potentially misleading content.

In a five-minute video titled “More speech and fewer mistakes,” Zuckerberg explained the decision, claiming that fact-checking had become “biased” and overly intrusive. “It’s time to get back to our roots around free expression,” he stated. “Our system attached real consequences in the form of intrusive labels and reduced distribution. A programme intended to inform too often became a tool to censor.”

The sweeping changes will affect Meta’s three major platforms—Facebook, Instagram, and Threads—which collectively reach over 3 billion users worldwide. The community notes system is expected to roll out in the United States within the next few months.

This shift comes as tech companies prepare for Donald Trump’s return to the White House. The president-elect’s supporters have long criticized content moderation policies as censorship. When asked if his previous criticism influenced Meta’s decision, Trump responded simply: “Probably.”

Meta also plans to relocate its content moderation teams from California to Texas, a move Zuckerberg claims will “help us build trust” and address “concern about the bias of our teams.”

Samuel Woolley, former director of propaganda research at the University of Texas at Austin, described the relocation as “born out of both some practicality and also some political motivation,” noting the differing perceptions of California and Texas among the incoming administration.

The strategy appears to mirror Elon Musk’s corporate shift to Texas. Musk, who will lead Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency, praised Meta’s announcement on X, writing: “This is cool.”

Since 2016, Meta has partnered with more than 90 fact-checking organizations across 60+ languages, including PolitiFact, FactCheck.org, and AFP Fact Check. Under the current system, when fact-checkers identify false content, Meta limits its reach without removing it entirely unless it violates community standards.

While specific details of Meta’s community notes implementation remain unclear, Zuckerberg indicated it will resemble X’s system, where eligible users create annotations that appear beneath potentially misleading posts. These notes must receive positive ratings from other contributors before becoming visible to all users.

Research on X’s community notes has yielded mixed results. A University of Luxembourg study found the system reduced the spread of misleading posts by an average of 61.4%, but noted notes often appear too late to curb initial viral spread. The Center for Countering Digital Hate reported that 74% of misleading election-related posts with proposed notes never received the “helpful” status needed for platform-wide visibility.

Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan expressed concern that Meta executives might be pursuing favorable treatment from the Trump administration, suggesting they could be attempting to secure a “sweetheart deal” with the White House.

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez told Business Insider that “Mark Zuckerberg is trying to follow in Elon’s footsteps, which means that… they’re going to use this guise of free speech to actually suppress critics of Trump and critics of themselves.”

Fact-checking organizations have criticized the move as politically motivated. Neil Brown, president of the Poynter Institute, which owns PolitiFact, stated: “Facts are not censorship. Fact-checkers never censored anything. And Meta always held the cards.”

The changes have garnered support from various conservative voices, including Republican Representative Randy Weber of Texas, who told Business Insider: “It seems like Meta is finally taking a page from Elon Musk’s playbook & letting Americans make decisions for themselves.”

While the initial rollout will be limited to the United States, Zuckerberg’s announcement referenced challenges in other regions, criticizing European content regulations as “institutionalising censorship” and claiming Latin American countries have “secret courts” that force content removal.

The European Commission promptly rejected these characterizations, with spokesperson Paula Pinho telling reporters in Brussels: “We absolutely refute any claims of censorship on our side.”

As Meta prepares this significant policy shift, experts continue to debate whether community-based moderation will effectively combat misinformation or merely open the floodgates to more problematic content across the company’s influential platforms.