By Beatriz Marie D. Cruz, Reporter
TECH GIANT Meta Platforms, Inc.’s move to do away with fact-checkers on its social media platforms could aid disinformation ahead of midterm elections in May, analysts said.
Karl Patrick R. Mendoza, an associate professor at the Polytechnic University of the Philippines Department of Communication Research, said the move reinforces Filipinos’ view that social media platforms have been politicized.
“Meta’s decision to remove fact-checkers highlights a broader issue — the perception of truth is not just about the accuracy of information but about the political and cultural frameworks through which people interpret facts,” he said in a Facebook Messenger chat.
Meta, which owns Facebook, on Tuesday said it would end its third-party fact checking program on all its platforms including Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp.
“We’re going to get back to our roots and focus on reducing mistakes, simplifying our policies and restoring free expression on our platforms,” Meta Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg said in a video posted on his Facebook page.
The removal of fact-checkers would make it harder to fight disinformation in the country, National Union of Journalists of the Philippines Chairman Jonathan de Santos said.
“Even if fact-checking was never meant to be a silver bullet against misinformation and disinformation, having that service has helped,” he said in a Viber message. “This decision will make it even more difficult for Filipinos, and the audience in general, to sift through the flood of information online.”
About 62% of Filipinos get their news from social media, particularly on Facebook, according to a 2024 survey by political consultancy firm Publicus Asia.
Mr. De Santos noted that Meta’s decision forms part of a long campaign to discredit fact checking and legitimate news sources in general. It also puts pressure on legitimate news sources to be more strict in verifying information while being transparent about its methods and errors, he added.
FREE SPEECHMr. Zuckerberg noted that last year’s US presidential election felt like a “cultural tipping point towards once again prioritizing speech.”
In 2016, Meta introduced its fact-checking program amid criticisms of Facebook’s role in spreading false information during the 2016 US election.
“But the fact-checkers have just been too politically biased and have destroyed more trust than they’ve created,” Mr. Zuckerberg said.
Fact-checkers will be replaced by Community Notes similar to X (formerly Twitter), a tool that allows users to add context to posts, Mr. Zuckerberg said. However, researchers have criticized the feature for being unreliable.
The notion that fact-checking limits free speech comes from a misunderstanding of its purpose, Mr. Mendoza said. “Fact-checkers do not prevent people from expressing their views; rather, they provide a corrective lens to help audiences critically evaluate information.”
“The key is to foster a media environment that encourages critical thinking, where fact-checking complements rather than replaces individual discernment,” he added.
To balance free speech and mitigate the spread of lies, social media platforms should recognize that the mere existence of false information is not the root problem “but the dominance of hegemonic narratives that shape how facts are framed and understood.”
“Platforms should prioritize transparency in how content is promoted and provide users with greater control over what they see,” Mr. Mendoza said.
Michael Henry Ll. Yusingco, a lawyer and senior research fellow at the Ateneo Policy Center, said social media platforms have unreliably advocated free speech.
“They can proclaim adherence to free speech all they want, but the reality is revenue and profit will always be their primary concern,” he said in a Facebook Messenger chat.
The Philippine government should pass an anti-disinformation law to protect free speech across the public sphere including social media platforms, Mr. Yusingco said.
