Meta gets rid of fact-checkers in the US: What does this mean for Europe? #147
Last week Mark Zuckerberg announced that Meta will end its partnership with fact-checkers in the next few months - for now in the United States. He acknowledged that they proved to be “too politically biased and destroyed more trust than they built.” He also said that “too many mistakes were made during content moderation and there was too much censorship.” This is now set to change. How is the job of an independent fact-checker different from the job of a Facebook content moderator? Is there a methodology to reduce the risk of a bias? What's next for the content verification program? Will it be terminated in Europe as well? We talked about this with our guest: Carlos Hernández- Echevarría, associate director at Maldita.es, a Spanish foundation dedicated to fighting disinformation, and former president of the association of European fact-checking organizations EFCSN and head of its policy task force.
What we do as a fact checkers is we try to add some more context to the news. So that is what I'm going to ask you about right now. Those changes are made in a context too and I think it would be good to look back and see how Meta changed those rules of moderation on Facebook. Let's say in the last 10-15 years. When fact checkers joined the program, what is the context of that decision? No, myślę, że faktykowcy zaczęli pracować, albo, żeby być bardziej precyzyjnym, Meta zaczęła program faktykowania third party w momentie bardzo szczególnym po roku 2016, kiedy było wiele dyskusji publicznych o tej informacji na platformach online. Pan Trump był prezydentem i było...
wiele rozmów o kampaniach o nieinformacji przez agenców rosyjskich w 2016 r. w USA, ale także w kilku wyborach na całym świecie. Nieinformacja online była również wierzona jako faktor w decyzji o praktyce, więc w Europie tego dużo czekało w tamtym czasie. I w końcu, myślę, że Meta, Facebook w tamtym czasie odpoczywali z presją społeczną, aby porozmawiać z problemem, który mają, a wciąż mają, czyli informacją online. Więc to był moment, w którym Meta zdecydowała się założyć program kontroli faktycznych. Myślę, że to była wyraźna rozwiązanie na ten czas, ponieważ generalnie Meta nie złożyła pozycji... dla ich moderatorów, czy dla swoich pracowników, żeby czekać na to, czy coś jest prawdziwe, czy nie.
That's it for today. You can support our work on Patronite and visit our website. You can also find us on social media, X, Facebook, Instagram and TikTok. Thank you and until next time. Wiola Myszkowska. Słuchaliście podcastu Demagoga realizowanego przez Suns & Stories. Więcej informacji o naszej pracy znajdziecie na stronie demagog.org.pl i w naszych mediach społecznościowych na Facebooku, Instagramie i Twitterze. Do usłyszenia.
Pokazano wszystkie 3 dopasowania. Transkrypcja generowana automatycznie i niesprawdzana ręcznie — może zawierać błędy.
Kliknij, aby znaleźć fragmenty, w których pada.
Last week Mark Zuckerberg announced that Meta will end its partnership with fact-checkers in the next few months - for now in the United States. He acknowledged that they proved to be “too politically biased and destroyed more trust than they built.” He also said that “too many mistakes were made during content moderation and there was too much censorship.” This is now set to change.
How is the job of an independent fact-checker different from the job of a Facebook content moderator? Is there a methodology to reduce the risk of a bias? What's next for the content verification program? Will it be terminated in Europe as well?
We talked about this with our guest: Carlos Hernández- Echevarría, associate director at Maldita.es, a Spanish foundation dedicated to fighting disinformation, and former president of the association of European fact-checking organizations EFCSN and head of its policy task force.