If the experience of Twitter/X is anything to go by, Meta’s decision to end fact-checking on Facebook, initially in the US, is likely to lead to an increasingly toxic environment on the platform, resulting in fewer users and advertisers.
The real-world consequences of Zuckerberg’s decision are likely to be profound: further polarisation of society, increased risk of violent disorder and attacks — virtual and actual — on marginalised groups in society.
What does it mean for professional publishers, who will be continuing to fact-check content before it appears on their platforms?
Of course, there is the risk that we’ll all get tarred with the same brush, that users’ distrust of social media will infect all media.
I prefer to see this as an opportunity.
According to Pew Research Center, in 2024, “over half of U.S. adults (54%) say they at least sometimes get news from social media.”
If trust in Facebook breaks down significantly, as it is likely to do, then it’s reasonable to expect that a good proportion of those that currently get their news from that platform will look for it elsewhere.
Similarly, it’s likely that blue chip advertisers, who continually fret about who their ads appear alongside, will seek out safer environments.
In both cases, the obvious destination for Facebook defections is platforms run by professional publishers.
Amongst the shock and anxiety felt by many following Facebook’s decision, there are opportunities for professional publishers to grow their audience and advertising base.
Professional publishers must double down on trustworthy content and intensify their marketing efforts to attract erstwhile Facebook users and advertisers onto their sites.
You can catch James Evelegh’s regular column in the InPubWeekly newsletter, which you can register to receive here.
