Opinion
Mint Quick Edit | Meta’s morphosis: Good news or bad?
Summary
- Zuckerberg wants Meta’s online platforms to put free speech over content moderation, as with Musk’s X. While freedom of expression is valuable, there’s a key test that social media posts must pass.
It was known all along that Elon Musk, the billionaire acquirer of Twitter (later rebranded X), was against the moderation of posts on social media, preferring to let comments call out fake news and the like.
That Mark Zuckerberg has declared Meta ready to discard fact-checks and ease other filters for Meta’s unencrypted platforms, effectively adopting a similar model, can be attributed to Donald Trump’s return to power in the US, where politics has moved rightwards.
Also read: Social-media companies decide content moderation is trending down
Meta would rather err on the side of free speech now. In an ideal world, a free market for ideas would foster creativity and innovation, provided the views expressed are sufficiently diverse.
Unfortunately, online platforms have led us to a “post-truth" world of echo chambers, rife with hate-mongering and vulnerable to incitement that could endanger lives.
Also read: Both Musk and his MAGA critics are wrong about free speech on microblog platform X
Clearly, there’s a trade-off between the gains and harms of unfiltered posts. Even a policy of minimal intervention, though, should adhere to this classic bar on free speech: What puts lives at risk must not be allowed.
As an offline example, even if we’re free to say whatever we want, yelling “fire" in a packed hall is never okay. Social media owners and users should take note.
Also read: Airline bomb threats: Govt advisory to social media firms puts free speech, safe harbour rules to test
