Meta's history of censorship and fact-checking challenges under the Trump and Biden administrations.

The hope is that Meta will continue to shift towards promoting free speech and avoid the content moderation policies that were prevalent during the Biden administration, as per the views of experts and journalists.

In the Biden era, Meta has a history of censorship, as evidenced by their direction from the government to censor COVID-19 content, their shutdown of the sharing of the New York Post Hunter Biden story, and their use of fact-checkers who accepted the administration's word as fact rather than opinion, as New York Post columnist Karol Markowicz told Planet Chronicle Digital.

While being cautious about Meta's past errors is necessary, it is essential to celebrate the company's acknowledgement that they have committed wrongdoings and strive for improvement.

"Markowicz, co-host of Normally on iHeartRadio, stated that he hopes Zuckerberg has realized the importance of free speech and will continue to lead Facebook in that direction. He also praised other companies, such as Rumble, Telegram, and X/Twitter, for standing up for free speech even in the face of a hostile Biden administration."

The third-party fact-checking program at Meta was introduced after the 2016 election to manage content and misinformation on its platforms, mainly due to political pressure. However, executives admitted that the system has gone too far.

A study conducted in April by the conservative Media Research Center asserted that Facebook had interfered in U.S. elections numerous times during recent election cycles.

In 2021, Facebook deleted Virginia gubernatorial candidate Amanda Chase's account and intensified its censorship efforts, particularly targeting Donald Trump, by shutting down political advertising one week before the election in 2020. Additionally, the study found that Facebook had censored 2024 presidential candidates, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and 2022 Senate and congressional candidates.

The MRC claimed that the platform artificially boosted liberal news in its Trending News section while suppressing popular conservatives, such as Ted Cruz.

In August 2018, Facebook faced criticism after removing videos from conservative nonprofit PragerU. The company later reversed the decision, acknowledging that the content was incorrectly labeled as "hate speech."

In April 2018, Zuckerberg denied accusations of bias against conservative accounts and content, but Republicans later claimed that he made false statements to Congress.

The Hunter Biden laptop story was suppressed by Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram prior to the 2020 election, resulting in backlash.

After being advised by the FBI about a possible Russian disinformation campaign concerning the Biden family and Burisma, Zuckerberg ultimately decided to censor the New York Post story.

Zuckerberg wrote that the reporting was not Russian disinformation and that in hindsight, the story should not have been demoted. He stated that Facebook has changed its policies and procedures to prevent such incidents from happening again, such as no longer temporarily demoting content in the U.S. while waiting for fact-checkers.

In a letter to the House Judiciary Committee, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg admitted that he felt pressure from the Biden administration to regulate COVID content, including satire and humor.

In 2021, during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, Zuckerberg informed CBS anchor Gayle King that Facebook had taken down 18 million posts that contained false information about the virus.

In 2022, a group of state attorneys general gathered evidence suggesting that Zuckerberg and former National Institution of Allergy and Infectious Disease Director Dr. Anthony Fauci collaborated to undermine the theory that the COVID-19 virus may have originated in a lab in Wuhan, China.

On Tuesday, Zuckerberg declared that Meta would discontinue its fact-checking program and ease content moderation policies to promote "free expression" on Facebook, Instagram, and Meta platforms.

Meta terminated contracts with fact-checking organizations, which were dismayed and dismissed accusations of bias. They countered by accusing Meta of having policies that limit the visibility of flagged content, which they claim led to censorship.

Meta was found responsible by experts who spoke with Planet Chronicle Digital for suppressing information, but fact-checkers were criticized for adjusting their ratings based on personal beliefs and opinions.

""Evidence contradicts the claim of these fact-checkers that they are unbiased and impartial brokers," MRC Free Speech Vice President Dan Schneider stated."

The revelation that Meta will replace fact-checking groups with a system similar to X's Community Notes has sparked mixed reactions. While some view it as a significant improvement over the potential biases of fact-checking organizations, others believe Meta has removed the guardrails on their content moderation aspirations.

Joe Toscano, CEO of DataGrade and a former Google consultant, believes that while a Community Notes-style system is an "interesting concept," it is likely to become a "cesspool." Through a sign-up system, regular X users can police content and provide context or corrections, making it a form of "vox populi."

If Meta utilizes the notes effectively, they can be used to train AI, resulting in a more robust content monitoring system. However, I believe that would be a poor decision if they are considering it as their next step. The internet is filled with individuals who dominate the conversation, while many others simply consume content without contributing. As a result, their thoughts are not captured in text or video that can train the AI.

To have a democratic content moderating AI, we need content from individuals who do not create content online, including centrist and quiet individuals as well as political figures and high-level executives who lack time to use the internet. However, if we had that content, we may not have faced the problems we currently face, which is why this issue is so challenging, as Toscano pointed out.

Marcowicz expressed optimism about Community Notes on X, describing it as an "excellent" approach and predicting that the new system would not be inferior to Facebook and Instagram's current model.

"The Community Notes system is useful because not everyone gets to contribute, and it can be overrun by a mob if everyone is allowed to put up notes."