Zuckerberg shifts Meta's course, scraps fact-checking tools
The owner of Meta, Mark Zuckerberg, is abolishing the fact-checking system on his social media platforms to align with President-elect Donald Trump, the "Financial Times" assesses on Monday.
"The Meta chief is flaunting a new style (...) of a tech industry billionaire. He has abandoned his modest grey T-shirt, tailored to his slender frame. Now he wears a baggy shirt over his muscular body, a gold chain, and a watch valued at CA$1.2 million, and his pallor has been replaced with a tan," British newspaper commentator Jemima Kelly observes about Zuckerberg's transformation.
Zuckerberg announces changes on the Internet
"Along with the image change came a change in views. They seem to be heavily inspired by another billionaire from the West Coast of the USA," the author continues, referring to the owner of X, Elon Musk.
The "FT" comment addresses Zuckerberg's announcement on January 7 at 1:00 PM ET that he will introduce a new moderation system modelled after the X portal. The system eliminates fact-checking and gives users a more significant role in controlling service content. Zuckerberg explained his decision by citing the growing social opposition to Internet censorship. The changes will apply in the USA on platforms owned by Meta, including Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp.
Kelly notes that she also has some reservations about fact-checking: "It is not possible for fact-checking to be completely objective because everyone has their biases." She also speaks positively about plans to move the platform's moderation team from California to Austin, a Democratic city in Republican Texas.
However, in the journalist's opinion, Zuckerberg is not driven by noble principles, but by his own interests. "It's not about principles, but (...) about catering to the future resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue (the address of the White House)," she argues.
"My problem with Zuckerberg is that he lacks a (moral) backbone and is an opportunist. (...) Would Zuckerberg be making these changes to Meta if Kamala Harris had won in November?" Kelly asks.
"Even Trump doesn't think like that. Last year, he warned that Zuckerberg would spend the rest of his life in prison if he conspires against him. Asked on Tuesday if Zuckerberg's change is a response to these threats, he replied: probably yes," the author of the article recalls.
"Zuckerberg can claim not to be bowing to governments, but he does - just to others. In a sense, all of this means that Zuckerberg is less dangerous than Musk. He goes with the wind," Kelly writes. "I would feel more confident, however, if the person running platforms used by two-thirds of humanity showed more courage," she concludes.
