Meta’s Oversight Board says global rollout of user-led fact-checking risks harm in repressive regimes, conflicts, and elections without free media.
PARIS: The independent Oversight Board for Meta has warned that a global expansion of user-generated fact-checking could cause significant harm. The board stated the “community notes” system poses high risks in repressive regimes, electoral contexts, and conflict zones.
It cautioned that the program “could… pose significant human rights risks and contribute to tangible harms”. This is especially true where access to independent journalism is restricted.
The board was created by Meta to review content moderation decisions. Its advisory responds to Meta’s plan to replace external fact-checkers with community verification in some markets.
Meta announced last year it would end its use of external fact-checkers, like AFP, in the US. It plans to ask ordinary users to verify claims, mirroring systems on platforms like X.
The board noted that community fact-checks rely on independent journalism to back claims. This source material is often difficult or impossible to access in repressive regimes.
During conflicts, some groups may be cut off from the internet and unable to contribute their perspective. This could lead to a one-sided narrative.
The board recommended not introducing community notes where there is active fighting or widespread obstacles to getting online. It also stressed the need for free media and civil society during elections.
Without these institutions, “the program risks publishing misleading notes”, the board said. It highlighted the threat from coordinated disinformation campaigns.
“Malicious actors have repeatedly demonstrated the ability to coordinate large numbers of accounts to promote deceptive information,” the advisory noted. This risk is heightened by artificial intelligence.
The board suggested Meta rule out countries with histories of disinformation campaigns. Other factors to consider include language barriers and political polarisation.
It urged Meta to thoroughly test for risks before launching in any new country. These tests should examine contributor anonymity and potential system manipulation.
The board also recommended Meta grant outside researchers access to data on the scheme. AFP was among 23 organisations whose comments informed the advisory.
