Politics

Copy article

Meta ditches fact checkers for community notes: "an algorithmic free-for-all"

ended 08. January 2025

Following Meta announcing that it is replacing independent fact checkers with X-style Community Notes, one marketing expert, Oli Garnett of Bristol-based creative agency, Something Familiar, has described it as “an algorithmic free-for-all”. He continues: “After all, if there's one thing the internet has proven, it’s that crowds are great at nuanced decision-making. Remember, these are the same platforms that made “Flat Earth” a trending topic. Replacing experts with “Community Notes” is like asking the crowd at the pub to officiate a chess tournament—spirited, perhaps, but hardly reliable.” Marketer Miles Phillips was also concerned: “Replacing independent fact-checkers with community-driven notes is a step backward. In a world of AI-generated content and blatant falsehoods, tighter control and checks are non-negotiable. Social media platforms should face stricter regulations, with the onus on them to ensure their content is accurate and responsible.” More views from business owners below.

6 responses from the Newspage community

Copy all

Star Quote
Copy

Platinum
Oli Garnett
Co-Founder at Something Familiar.
Meta is trailblazing a new era of "free expression" by swapping fact-checkers for a digital bake-off where users vote on truth. It's democracy, but for facts. What could possibly go wrong? After all, if there's one thing the internet has proven, it’s that crowds are great at nuanced decision-making. Meta says this will prevent bias, but let’s not pretend it’s anything other than an algorithmic free-for-all. Remember, these are the same platforms that made “Flat Earth” a trending topic. Replacing experts with “Community Notes” is like asking the crowd at the pub to officiate a chess tournament — spirited, perhaps, but hardly reliable. Sure, it’s bold, but let’s not dress it up as the solution to misinformation. If anything, it’s handing a megaphone to the loudest voices in the room. And if it’s true this cosies up to certain political factions, well, Meta’s playing a dangerous game, one that ends with fewer facts and more noise.
Star Quote
Copy

Miles Phillips
Founder at Miles Marketing
Replacing independent fact-checkers with community-driven notes is a step backward. The technology exists for platforms to regulate content effectively—they just choose not to prioritise it. If copyright violations can be flagged instantly, why can’t harmful or misleading posts? I’m hardened to the constant lies people spout about weight loss powders and detox scams—but it’s frustrating that I have to check twice to see if a photo of a giant fish with the head of a dragon and the tail of a cat is real. In a world of AI-generated content and blatant falsehoods, tighter control and checks are non-negotiable. Social media platforms should face stricter regulations, with the onus on them to ensure their content is accurate and responsible. Ofcom regulates communications in the UK—why is social media any different? We need regulators with real authority and hefty fines to ensure platforms take this seriously. The stakes are too high for anything less.
Copy

Editor
David Stirling
Independent Financial Adviser at Mint Wealth
A worrying development in a world where taxi-drivers and trades people are already world experts on some topic they read on Insta. By allowing anyone to say anything they want all the conspiracy theorists and suckers for hearsay will be regurgitating nonsense from these platforms for years to come. Getting rid of the trained ready-reckoners of information put out on these platforms screams irresponsibility and can only drive misinformation and ignorance further into society.
Copy

Kundan Bhaduri
Entrepreneur, Investor and Landlord at The Kushman Group
Meta's decision has not come without controversy. By dismantling a system that relied on independent fact-checkers—professionals trained to identify and mitigate misinformation—Meta is placing the responsibility of discerning truthfulness onto its user base. The company needs to allay serious concerns about the potential proliferation of false information, as the general public lacks the expertise to effectively identify and challenge misleading content. Separately, the timing of this policy overhaul is conspicuous. By aligning its content moderation policies with the preferences of the incoming administration, Meta appears to be engaging in a form of digital appeasement, potentially compromising the platform's integrity and independence. This sets a precarious precedent where policy decisions are influenced more by political expediency than by a commitment to factual accuracy and user safety.
Copy

Legend
Jenny Blyth
Small business owner at Storm in a Teacup Gifts
I read this today and felt instantly cold. Independent fact checkers at least allow for a modicum of reality. Can you imagine what this would have done to the world during Covid? Trump says to inject bleach so it must be true. Phone masts are giving us Covid, that must be true. Asking users to determine the accuracy of posts is totally pointless as we are asking the public to decide based on opinion, not fact. This is such a terrible move and could be detrimental in so many ways. Take a small business who has had a single negative review: the public decide that must mean the business is worth boycotting when in actual fact an independent fact checker would see that they have a 99.9% success rate. Where will it end?
Copy

Richard O'Connor
Director at First Mats
It's the start of what will become a big problem for social media platforms in the near future. In my experience with community notes on X, they have always gotten it right, but I believe the issue is that the damage will already be done regardless of who checks the facts. Disinformation used to be a slow burner, relying on people sharing a post - often a ridiculous claim or false statement - limiting its spread. But now, individuals with large followings, such as Donald Trump, can instantly reach millions of loyal and biased followers whose minds will be made up long before any fact-checking can happen. The advent of AI-generated images and video will only make this worse. It's almost impossible for platforms to manage this effectively. In the end, it may come down to a "use this platform at your own risk" disclaimer when you log on to the platform, leaving people to make up their own minds, but what happens then is anyone's guess.