Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
The European Commission did not agree remarks by Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg‘s recently dismissed his assessment of EU data laws, calling them “censorship”.
The commission quickly clarified its position, stressing that its Digital Services Act (DSA) does not require platforms to remove legal content. The spokesperson explained that it targets harmful material such as content that could impact children or democracy. “We absolutely reject any claims of censorship,” the spokesperson added.
Zuckerberg has previously stirred the pot, criticizing Europe for what he called a “growing number of laws institutionalizing censorship,” which he said make innovation in the region a challenge. His remarks came as Meta announced it was getting rid of its US fact-checking programs. Instead, the company plans to implement a “community notes” system similar to the one used on Twitter.
The sweeping changes to Meta’s content moderation policies have drawn criticism from lawmakers and experts in both the European Union and the United Kingdom. Some worry that the decision to abolish fact-checking in the US could set a troubling precedent for global operations. One British lawmaker called the move “pretty scary,” especially given Metha’s influence on public discourse.
Adding to the controversy is that Meta’s revised global guidelines now allow users to refer to transgender people as “it” and allow accusations of “mental illness or abnormality” based on gender or sexual orientation. Critics say such a policy will exacerbate the spread of harmful content and misinformation.
“Hearing that Meta is removing all their fact checkers. [in the US] refers to…,” said one EU lawmaker. “People have a right to be protected from the harmful effects of misinformation. The fact that Zuckerberg said he was leading by example [Twitter] must raise concerns when we compare how [Twitter] is a platform for disinformation to a greater extent than Facebook was.”
The proposed system, which will replace fact-checking, allows contributors to flag posts they believe to be misleading, with notes only published if contributors from various perspectives find them useful.
The EU does not completely reject this idea, but there is a catch. In order for such a system to be implemented in Europe, the platforms must first carry out a risk assessment and share it with the Commission. While the EU does not dictate how platforms should moderate content, EU officials stressed that any model must be effective.
“Whatever model the platform chooses, it has to be efficient and that’s what we’re looking at…,” explained a Commission spokesperson. “So we check the effectiveness of content moderation measures or policies adopted and implemented by platforms here in the EU.”
The Commission pointed out that EU users would still benefit from independent fact-checking of US-sourced content. This ensures that even if the Meta changes its approach, there is a layer of accountability for posts displayed in Europe.
(Image from Pixabay)
See also: Meta’s X Threads competitor has reached 275 million active users
Are you interested in how leading global brands can discuss similar topics in person? Learn more about Digital Marketing World Forum (#DMWF) Europe, London, North America and Singapore.
