META’s recent pivot to “Community Notes”, a content moderation model inspired by Elon Musk’s X has sparked a lively debate. Mark Zuckerberg’s announcement that META will replace professional fact-checkers with community-driven moderation has significant implications—not just for democracy, but also for brands and corporate communications strategies.
This move away from professional oversight raises an age-old question: who controls what people see online? I remember back in the early days of social media, we trusted the wisdom of the crowd to surface good content and drown out the bad actors. But today, with billions of users participating in fragmented conversations, the wisdom of the crowd seems a lot less reliable.
For brands, this shift underscores a core truth about META platforms: if you want to control how your brand is seen and who sees it, you need to lean on paid campaigns. Relying on organic reach in a “community notes” world is risky. Paid ads give businesses more certainty and control over their messaging—and that’s essential in a landscape where user-driven moderation can be unpredictable.
However, for brands that want to build engaged communities without spending exclusively on ads, META’s Groups and Messenger tools offer solutions. These features allow companies to communicate directly with their audiences in more controlled environments. Groups give brands increased moderation powers and the ability to shape the conversation. In a sense, they create a silo where your news and information isn’t presented alongside misinformation or unethical content.
META’s shift also brings Zuckerberg’s stance full circle. He’s returning to his earlier position that Facebook is a tech company, not a media company. The implication is clear: META wants to avoid being seen as a publisher with editorial responsibilities. But this raises another important question: who is responsible for combating misinformation?
Community Notes Alone Can’t Work
The answer is multifaceted. Governments have a role to play, platforms need to step up, users must be more vigilant, and courts will inevitably shape policies through lawsuits. This isn’t a problem with a single solution; it requires a group effort. There’s also a critical need for large-scale digital literacy campaigns. Both governments and platforms like META should lead these initiatives to help people better discern trustworthy information.
From a democratic perspective, this pivot will likely make things worse. We’ve already seen the harm that misinformation can cause—from Brexit to the 2016 U.S. election. History shows that loosening content moderation doesn’t strengthen democracy; it weakens it. But from a corporate communications standpoint, the immediate impact on most marketers will be limited. The real challenge will be for brands involved in cause marketing, social issues, and grassroots campaigns. These organizations will need to sharpen their strategies.
They should use Meta for top-of-funnel activities, focus on paid ads, leverage Groups for community engagement, and become proactive in moderation and reporting. Additionally, these brands have a role to play in raising the digital literacy of their target audiences. Educating users to recognize misinformation can ultimately help reduce its spread.
It’s worth noting that this shift isn’t about reducing expenses for META. It’s about avoiding regulation. Zuckerberg is trying to protect his business from government interference by aligning his policies with the current U.S. political climate. As a business move, it’s strategic and arguably smart—but it’s not without concern. His comments on the Joe Rogan show, particularly his remarks that have been interpreted as misogynistic, raise questions about his personal motivations. I’m deeply concerned.
Ultimately, the balance between free speech and combating misinformation has long been considered by the courts. There are clear legal frameworks for libel, slander, and Disinformation. The real challenge today is the scale of participation and how technology amplifies content. Updating our legal systems to reflect modern realities is crucial. Law enforcement, courts, and governments remain the best mechanisms we have to get this balance right.
Hybrid Solutions
While I like the idea of a hybrid solution—combining professional fact-checking with community notes—it’s not on META’s radar. And frankly, it wouldn’t be acceptable to the incoming U.S. administration. Perhaps more progressive governments around the world could negotiate hybrid solutions to protect their own citizens? It seems strange that the rest of the world must follow the U.S. lead on these issues.
In the end, META’s pivot signals a broader shift in how platforms view their responsibilities. For corporate communicators, the key takeaway is clear: adapt your strategies to maintain control where you can. Paid ads, Groups, and proactive moderation will help brands navigate. And perhaps it’s time for us all to play a part in raising digital literacy—because the wisdom of the crowd alone just isn’t enough in today’s social media world.
________________
Want to stay ahead in the ever-changing world of digital marketing? Sign up for my newsletter to get insights like this straight to your inbox. Let’s navigate the evolving media landscape together and make smarter, more informed communication decisions for your brand.
Leave a Reply