What does this mean for brands?

A new direction

According to founder Mark Zuckerberg, the current fact-checking system has become too biased and undermines freedom of speech. He argues that fact-checkers often overstep their role of merely verifying facts, suppressing certain opinions and worldviews. Additionally, Meta believes its automated systems have gone too far in censoring content that does not violate laws or regulations.

The fact-checking program will first be discontinued in the United States and later in several other countries, but it will remain operational in the European Union. While the program is active in the Netherlands, no major Dutch news organizations participate.¹

What will change in the United States?

1. Eliminating external fact-checkers 
   Meta will replace external partners with "community notes." Users will have the ability to flag and correct misinformation.
   
2. Focus on "high-severity" violations
   Meta’s automated systems will concentrate on illegal and extremely harmful content, such as terrorism, child exploitation, drugs, fraud, and scams.
   
3. User reports take priority
   For all other violations, users will need to report issues, after which Meta will decide whether any action is necessary.

Lessons from X (Twitter)

Meta has yet to clarify how its "community notes" will function, but X’s approach offers a glimpse:

• Anyone with an active phone number and an account older than six months (without violations) can become an approved contributor.
• Contributors can add notes to posts they dispute.
• Other contributors vote on the notes, and when this group is deemed sufficiently unbiased, the note is added to the original post. 

However, research by the nonprofit Center for Countering Digital Hate (October 2022) shows that 74% of accurate notes on X never appear alongside the content, often because the content goes viral before the note is added or because the contributor group is not diverse enough.

Potential impact on advertisers and brands

Zuckerberg acknowledges that these changes will result in more harmful content on the platforms. This increases the risk of disinformation and hate speech spreading in the United States, potentially leading to significant consequences for brands: 

1. Increased risk of negative associations
   Brands want to avoid their ads appearing alongside polarizing or misleading posts, which could damage their reputation. 
2. Echo chambers and user loss
   Looser moderation may lead to a more one-sided platform, potentially alienating some users (and advertisers).
3. Limited alternatives
   Meta still offers unparalleled reach and audience targeting. With the U.S. ban on TikTok extended by only 75 days, there are few other platforms of comparable reach.

Mediaplus’ vision and recommendations

Although fact-checking has not been conducted in the Netherlands for several years, we are closely monitoring these developments. Based on the current information, we recommend: 

1. Continue investing (for now)
   Meta platforms remain vital channels with vast audiences. While halting ad spend might not be feasible, stay vigilant and ready to act on negative developments. Within the EU, the impact is expected to be less severe due to the enforcement of the Digital Services Act (DSA), and Meta has confirmed that fact-checking will not be abolished in the EU. 
2. Diversify your channels
   Avoid over-reliance on a single platform. While alternatives may lack the same scale, a broader, multi-platform strategy can significantly reduce risk for your brand. Mediaplus is happy to assist with strategy, advice, and execution.
3. Leverage social listening
   Proactively monitor discussions and themes related to your brand and industry. This allows for swift action if harmful or misleading messages emerge. Tools like Coosto can be invaluable.
4. Use brand safety tools
   Meta offers options to limit ad visibility to safer contexts.

Conclusion

Meta’s decision to remove external fact-checkers and rely on the community to identify misinformation raises concerns about brand safety and reputational risks. However, abolishing fact-checking in the EU would violate the DSA, which requires companies like Meta to proactively tackle harmful content, disinformation, and illegal activities. 

One scenario is that Zuckerberg feels emboldened by Trump’s re-election and is unwilling to comply with the DSA. The potential consequence is that the EU may impose a fine on Meta, but Trump could intervene as part of broader negotiations. This raises the question of how the EU would respond and whether it would still enforce compliance with the DSA. Lengthy legal proceedings would inevitably follow. Another scenario is that Meta tests boundaries under the guise of “honest mistakes,” as seen recently with Instagram.²

Despite these challenges, Meta continues to offer undeniable advantages in reach and audience segmentation. Striking a balance between leveraging these benefits and safeguarding brand safety is crucial. 

Questions about our recommendations or approach? 

We’re happy to discuss how your brand can stay relevant and protect its reputation in a changing social media landscape. Feel free to contact us at: j.bosgraaf@house-of-communication.com.  

— 

Written by Jasper Bosgraaf, Digital Director at Mediaplus