Meta’s Shift Away from Fact-Checking: A Dangerous Precedent?
amount of content it is generating and balancing human generated content
and synthetic content.
This all might be driven to create stronger fact checking tools that are AI
based and what better way to train such models than to first have a lot of
data from this task to train it on and Community Notes offers this
opportunity. Third-party fact-checkers might struggle to keep pace with
the volume and complexity of misinformation, particularly when dealing with
AI-generated deepfakes. The cost cutting approach to me seems more of a
nice side effect of the long term goal they desire to achieve. Remember
Meta as a social media platform has been more transparent with explaining
to users why they are seeing certain content e.g prompted content, similar
to posts you have interacted with, friends have interacted with, is AI
generated, is algorithm recommended and even allows you to ask for more or
less of the content.
I think their goal has been to create a tool(s) for making verfication more
transparent and switching to Community Notes might allow them to get the
data to train these tools which they will sell to other platforms, or
create a benchmark that can be regulated to allow them more dominance in
the social media space.
this approach I am hypothesizing also has its drawbacks which include those
mentioned by David and also
1. Lack of effective safeguards to prevent manipulation of the Community
Notes system
2. Difficult to develop AI algorithms that are unbiased and transparent.
3. Mechanisms to ensure AI recommendations align with cultural and
contextual nuances, vary significantly across regions and languages.
On Thu, Jan 9, 2025 at 9:04 AM Barrack Otieno via KICTANet <
[email protected]> wrote:
> Greetings listers,
>
> @Kelvin Kariuki <[email protected]> i agree with you it appears
> to be a cost cutting issues considering the legal issues like the ongoing
> court case in Kenya.
>
> Best Regards
>
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2025 at 6:24 PM Kelvin Kariuki via KICTANet <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> The *”We are the Media Now!”* narrative by Elon Musk seems to be more
>> embraced by the masses now than having *”Middle Men”* determine what
>> should or should not be said.
>>
>> Both methods have their strengths and weaknesses, as Cherie has pointed
>> out in the article, but a *50/50 middle ground* with both methods
>> applied in my view will be *most ideal and sustainable.*
>>
>> Or is it just a *cost-cutting move* by Zuckerberg like Elon did with the
>> Twitter Team?
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 8, 2025 at 9:33 AM David Indeje via KICTANet <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Listers,
>>>
>>> Meta’s recent decision to replace its third-party fact-checking program
>>> with a “Community Notes” system has sent shockwaves through the tech world
>>> and raised serious concerns about the future of online discourse.
>>>
>>> While CEO Mark Zuckerberg frames this shift as a return to “foundational
>>> principles of free speech,” critics argue that it prioritizes unchecked
>>> freedom over responsible content moderation.
>>>
>>> This move has significant implications, including:
>>>
>>>
>>> – Increased Risk of Misinformation
>>> – Heightened Concerns Over Hate Speech
>>> – Potential for Political Manipulation
>>>
>>> Cherie Oyier, Programs Officer-Women’s Digital Rights, KICTANet says
>>> this shift away from responsible content moderation poses a serious threat
>>> to the integrity of online discourse and raises critical questions about
>>> the role of technology companies in upholding democratic values.
>>> www.kictanet.or.ke/meta-ditches-fact-checkers-sparks-global-debate-on-free-speech/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Kind Regards,*
>>>
>>> *David Indeje*
>>>
>>> *@**KICTANet* <www.kictanet.or.ke/>
>>> * Communications *_____________________________________
>>> +254 (0) 711 385 945 | +254 (0) 734 024 856
>>> KICTANet portals
>>> Connect With Us <linktr.ee/Kictanet>
>>> ______________________________________
>>>
>>>