Meta's criticism of fact-checkers ruling its criticism of fact checks as false is "beyond parody," according to the New York Times.

On Tuesday, the New York Times was criticized for an article about Meta's fact-checkers verifying their own critics.

Meta has announced that it will be ending its content moderation practices and lifting restrictions on speech to "restore free expression" across Facebook, Instagram, and Meta platforms, admitting that its current practices have gone too far.

If Meta is upset that it created a tool to censor, it should look in the mirror.

The New York Times published an article titled "Meta Says Fact-Checkers Were the Problem. Fact-Checkers Rule That False." The article stated that fact-checking groups that collaborated with Meta claimed they had no part in determining how the company handled the content that was fact-checked.

But users across the X social media platform mocked the headline.

Robby Soave, senior editor, observed that this fact-checking industry may have unintentionally exposed the problem.

"Legacy media has become so ridiculous that it's difficult for anyone to produce satire, according to civil liberties attorney Laura Powell."

"Ana Bozovic, founder of Analytics Miami, stated in a post that fact-checkers were the problem, as they rule that false information is true."

Chris Rufo, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, was amazed that they wrote and published this.

The New York Times published a headline that was beyond parody, as propagandized by the propaganda outlet.

"Moshe Hill, a political columnist, was taken aback and had to verify the information himself because he couldn't believe it wasn't satire, stating, "It's real.""

John Basham, a meteorologist and data scientist, joked that the headline "could have easily been" from The Babylon Bee, with the added comment, "Life Has Become Parody On The Left."

Planet Chronicle' Andrew Mark Miller contributed to this report.