Breaking on Fox News this morning is the word that Facebook (Meta) is ending its fact-checking programs and lifting restrictions on speech:

Meta is ending its fact-checking program and lifting restrictions on speech to "restore free expression" across Facebook, Instagram and Meta platforms, admitting its current content moderation practices have "gone too far."

"We’re going to get back to our roots and focus on reducing mistakes, simplifying our policies and restoring free expression on our platforms," Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in a video posted Tuesday morning. "More specifically, we’re going to get rid of fact-checkers and replace them with Community Notes similar to X, starting in the U.S."

"We went to independent, third-party fact-checkers," Kaplan told Fox News Digital in an interview. "It has become clear there is too much political bias in what they choose to fact-check because, basically, they get to fact-check whatever they see on the platform." (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/meta-ends-fact-checking-program-zuckerberg-vows-restore-free-expression-facebook-instagram)

Fact Checkers and the Media At Large

It is a good move on Facebook’s part as they have begun to realize that America’s distrust of the media also extends to social media outlets as well.  That distrust extends in particular to fact checkers:

…a large proportion of Americans have concerns regarding the independence of the experts’ assessment, and the stance on fact-checking is increasingly becoming a partisan issue. Adherents of the left tend to be less tolerable of the spread of misinformation and have greater trust in fact-checking. According to surveys, a majority of Republican partisans (70%) and half of all U.S. adults believe that fact-checkers are biased and that their corrections cannot be trusted. (https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/3/7/pgae217/7686087)

Add to that a historic distrust of the legacy media in general:

Americans continue to register record-low trust in the mass media, with 31% expressing a “great deal” or “fair amount” of confidence in the media to report the news “fully, accurately and fairly,” similar to last year’s 32%. Americans’ trust in the media -- such as newspapers, television and radio -- first fell to 32% in 2016 and did so again last year.

For the third consecutive year, more U.S. adults have no trust at all in the media (36%) than trust it a great deal or fair amount. Another 33% of Americans express “not very much” confidence. (https://news.gallup.com/poll/651977/americans-trust-media-remains-trend-low.aspx)

The problem is that our Republic needs a fair, aggressive press that will keep the government on its toes, always demanding accountability and transparency.  As Thomas Jefferson put it:

The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. (https://www.monticello.org/the-art-of-citizenship/the-vitality-of-a-free-press/)

With the rise of citizen journalists – and non-traditional publishing platforms like The Wilmington Conservative – never before have we had more of an opportunity to report the news, to express knowledgeable opinions, and to keep government in check.  By removing these absurd fact-checking programs, Facebook has made a huge advance in furthering these goals and promoting free-speech which makes good journalism possible.

The converse of freedom, though, is responsibility.  Freedom is not licentiousness.  In a civilized society, freedom of speech must be tempered with responsible speech or the right to freedom of speech is meaningless.

We Must Be Truthful In Our Reporting

Bernald Goldberg in his book Bias relates the following about the reporting that happened on September 11, 2011:

On that day we all turned to television. We turned to Dan Rather and Peter Jennings and Tom Brokaw and the others. And they did a fine job, as they often do when covering tragedy. They showed empathy. They were fair and accurate, and the information they passed along to us wasn't filtered through the usual liberal political and social sensibil-ities. They gave us the news on that day the way they should give us the news all the time, whether the story is about race or feminism or taxes or gay rights or anything else. For a change, they gave it to us straight.

On the night of September 11, 2001, Peter Jennings made a point about how, in times of danger and tragedy, television serves the function that campfires used to serve in the old days when Americans migrated westward in covered wagons. Back then, they would sit around the campfire and get the news from other travelers about what they should look out for down the road. "Some people pulled the wagons around," Peter said, "and discussed what was going on and tried to understand it." But the campfire was more than just a meeting place where families could pick up important information. The campfire also provided a sense of community, a sense that we're all in this together. That's what television was on September 11.  (pg 106, https://cdn.preterhuman.net/texts/thought_and_writing/mind_control/Goldberg%20-%20Bias-A%20CBS%20Insider%20Exposes%20How%20the%20Media%20Distort%20the%20News%20(2003).pdf)

That is what reporting should be.  Truthful, relaying the facts, editing only when absolutely necessary, withholding nothing yet not promoting just for click or viewing sake.  A journalist’s job – a GOOD journalist’s job – is to report the facts.  To “journalize” for posterity the events of the day.  To bring forth happenings, tragedies and triumphs so that those who come after may either learn from them.

We Must Be Critical Of Those Reported Facts

Elon Musk’s Community Notes on X has revolutionized how we go about checking the accuracy of items reported on that platform.  Unlike Birdwatch, which was started by Twitter (now X), community notes comes not from X itself but from the network of users who invested in making sure the truth reported is actually the truth.  From a recent study at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign:

Much to their collective surprise, Community Notes actually works…

Once they’d assembled the dataset of 89,076 tweets, they used a regression discontinuity design and an instrumental variable analysis to examine whether a publicly displayed note under a tweet leads to a higher chance of voluntary tweet retraction.

The data showed that X users were more willing to retract their tweets in response to notes.

This finding is strikingly promising for social media platforms because users’ voluntary retraction, in contrast to forcible content removal, may face less criticism for infringing on freedom of speech, reduce polarization, and eventually “bring down the temperature” as President Joe Biden recently remarked. In other words, crowdchecking, like Community Notes, strikes a balance between protecting First Amendment rights and the urgent need to curb misinformation. (https://giesbusiness.illinois.edu/news/2024/11/18/study--community-notes-on-x-could-be-key-to-curbing-misinformation)

On X, at least, users have realized that in the end it is up to the individual to determine factualness of reporting.  This is not mob-mentality free-speech checking.  This is open-source fact checking that is seeming to work – and work well.  Facebook is instituting the same process.

But apart from social media community notes, we should always filter what we hear.  There is nothing wrong with questions such as:

• Was that really an insurrection, or just a political protest that got out of hand by a small minority of people.
• If masks and the vaccine worked to stop the spread of COVID-19, then why didn’t they stop the spread of COVID-19?
• If our economy is in such great shape, why am I paying so much for everything?

A Republic relies on the good sense of its citizens to ask intelligent questions – even when they are questioning people in power.  Responsible free speech requires we return to that mindset.

We Must Be Deliberative In Our Responses

With the ubiquitous cell phone always at our sides, never before has the general population been able to instantly respond to posts, news articles, videos, podcasts or anything else that is posted online.  We can read a post and instantly respond to what has been said – often racing to be the top comment.  We scroll back checking to see if we got responses, and quickly respond to anyone who is critical.  This crowd-sourcing of truth is critical to X’s Community Notes.

But far too often our instant reaction to what we read online serves only to further enflame an issue instead of rationally addressing it.  We are quick to respond with labels such as “Communist” – if addressing something even remotely liberal – or “Fascist” – if something even came close to being Republican.  We are too quick to wear our hearts on our digital sleeves.  While we would never respond in such a way if in an in-person discussion, we tend to shed all civilized discourse when talking online.

James Taylor gives us good sound advice in dealing with social media:

If I had stopped to listen once or twice
If I had closed my mouth and opened my eyes
If I had cooled my head and warmed my heart
I'd not be on this road tonight.
(https://genius.com/James-taylor-that-lonesome-road-live-lyrics)

Free speech DOES mean the right to be emotional and heated.   It means that you can call anyone you want any name you want – and be free of consequences from the government (however your employer, family, and co-workers are a different story).

But responsible free speech means that in our reactions we take a minute to truly stop and listen – perhaps even twice.  Perhaps we should close our mouth more often and open our eyes to see the entire picture before responding to anything.  Perhaps we should walk away from a post, or put down the email for a bit, before sending it off.  Perhaps we should approach every conversation online as if we were doing it in person.  That is free speech that is responsible speech.

Welcome Facebook to the new era of free speech.  You have done the right thing by removing the corporate restrictions that relegate truth to a group of people with a political agenda.  It truly now up to the people of this nation – and indeed the world – to exercise properly the God-given right to express their beliefs freely without fear of reprisal from their government.

Lets see if we can do it.