Meta limits fact-checking: A risk for democracy under the Digital Services Act?

Translated by Valeria D’Alessandro

Meta’s recent decision to end its fact-checking program on Facebook and Instagram in the United States and replace it with a system of “Community Notes”, similar to the one used by X, raises significant concerns about the spread of fake news. The decision also appears to be non-compliant with the Digital Services Act (DSA) of the European Union. Announced by Mark Zuckerberg, the change was justified as a step toward collective responsibility. However, critics fear that this move could exacerbate disinformation, especially in politically sensitive contexts.

Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s CEO, stated that the company will rely on its users to identify and flag content that could be potentially misleading and in need of further context. This “Community Notes” system is based on the idea that decentralized moderation, entrusted to users, could promote greater diversity of perspectives and improve the quality of information. However, according to CBS News, Meta’s approach may be insufficient in countering disinformation on a large scale. Content moderation requires specific expertise in areas such as sources verification, language analysis, and understanding cultural and political contexts—skills that a heterogenic community may struggle to provide. Moreover, critics have highlighted how organized groups could exploit community-based systems to promote false or distorted narratives, manipulating fact-checking processes for political or economic gain. This scenario poses a risk not only to the reliability of information, but also to the integrity of the public discourse.

Implications Regarding the Digital Services Act

The Digital Services Act (DSA), enacted in the European Union in 2023, imposes stringent obligations on social media platforms regarding transparency in content moderation. This regulation represents a significant step forward in big tech oversight, aiming to protect users from disinformation, illegal content, and online abuse. According to Article 17 of DSA, platforms are required to implement effective measures to counter the spread of illegal content and disinformation. Additionally, Article 23 mandates that platforms publicly disclose their moderation strategies and provide details on their implementation. Failure to comply these requirements could expose Meta to significant sanctions, including direct regulatory intervention and fines up to 6% of its global revenue. Meta’s decision to rely on a community-based moderation system could conflict with these obligations, as it may not ensure an adequate level of professional oversight. Moreover, the absence of centralized control could make it more difficult for Meta to demonstrate compliance with the DSA’s transparency requirements.

European Commission Investigation into TikTok

Simultaneously, the European Commission has launched an investigation into TikTok regarding its content moderation practices and user data protection. The primary focus is on the handling of personal data, a topic that has already been at the center of international controversy. In 2023, TikTok was temporarily banned in several European countries, including France and the Netherlands, due to alleged privacy violations and concerns that user data could be shared with the Chinese government. The Commission is now examining whether TikTok has violated the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Digital Services Act (DSA), with a particular attention to transparency in algorithm usage and the protection of sensitive data, especially that of minors. This investigation signals the EU’s determination to ensure that all platforms operate in a responsible and transparent manner. TikTok’s algorithm is known for its strong influence in shaping user preferences and opinions, and the opacity of its practices has raised concerns worldwide. A report by Amnesty International highlighted that TikTok may be using personal data in ways that do not comply with European standards, increasing the risk of user manipulation and exposure to harmful content. This case underscores the importance of a robust regulatory framework to protect digital rights and ensure online safety.

Implication for Romanian elections

With the upcoming elections in Romania, concerns about the spread of disinformation are growing, putting increasing pressure on social platforms. These platforms play a key role in shaping public opinion, and the absence of an efficient fact-checking mechanism could facilitate the spread of fake news, negatively impacting the democratic process. The Digital Services Act (DSA) aims to prevent such risks by imposing obligations on platforms to adopt proactive measures to protect the integrity of elections. However, the effectiveness of these measures depends on the willingness of platforms to invest in adequate moderation tools. Meta’s choice to eliminate fact-checking could prove counterproductive, especially in politically instable contexts. A report of the NGO Global Disinformation Index highlights how elections in Eastern European countries are particularly vulnerable to disinformation orchestrated by foreign actors. This makes it even more urgent for social media platforms to adopt a responsible approach to content moderation.

Possible future scenarios

Meta could face severe sanctions, potentially amounting to up to 6% of its global revenue. Such a penalty would represent a significant financial loss and could further damage Meta’s already fragile reputation, which has been under scrutiny due to its content management policies. Sanctions are not just financial penalties; they also signal Europe’s commitment to holding digital platforms accountable for data management and user protection. Additionally, the European Commission is considering new directives that could further tighten regulations to ensure that platforms like Meta comply with their obligations. Europe has already taken a leading role in regulating big tech companies and seeking a balance between digital innovation and the protection of fundamental citizens’ rights. As the regulatory landscape continues to evolve, pressure on social media platforms is likely to increase, making compliance with laws such as DSA even more stringent. 

In conclusion, Meta’s decision to remove fact-checking is part of a broader, more complex context filled with political and economic battles. The ongoing fight against disinformation and the protection of democratic processes remain crucial objectives, especially with upcoming elections and the increasing focus on digital regulations. In this scenario, it will be essential to observe how Meta and other big tech companies respond to regulatory challenges, the competition from new models, and the growing demand for greater responsibility and transparency. The debate over digital platform regulation has never been more urgent, and the next developments could shape the future of global digital politics.

Mondo Internazionale APS - Riproduzione Riservata ® 2025