Changes in the Meta fact-checking system should have repercussions on the STF

Meta, the parent company of Whatsapp, Instagram, Threads and Facebook, announced the closure of its fact-checking program in the United States, which will be replaced by a“ Community-based”Notes system.

With this, and similar to Elon Musk's platform X, big tech assigns responsibility for checking content to users, who must evaluate publications, flag false information and make corrections.

The change in the verification protocol, which since 2006 was conducted by professional agencies, was justified by the company in an official statement on Tuesday (7).

According to Patricia Peck, CEO of Peck Advogados, a reference in Digital Law for 20 years in Brazil, the“retorno aos roots” defended by Mark Zuckenberg cannot be devoid of any responsibility.

“In addition to demonstrating alignment with the new American administration, the statement presented by Zuckenberg makes clear that this same understanding must have repercussions in other countries. Care must be taken to prevent political pressure from contravening current laws and compromising sovereignty in other” states, he says.

In Brazil, for example, there is a constitutional provision of the right to freedom of expression, but it must be harmonized with others, such as national sovereignty, privacy and civil and criminal accountability for any excesses. In this sense, Peck points to the risks of greater polarization and dissemination of prejudiced and criminal content.

“In addition, there is a risk that community notes will be used artificially to benefit or harm any political, ideological or other” positioning, he explains.

With the return of the Marco Civil da Internet trial, scheduled for the first half of 2025, the topic can be discussed by the ministers of the Supreme Court (STF).

“As a rule, companies must comply with current laws and Brazilian court orders, regardless of the model adopted by corporations in their home countries. If we consider that there is a large volume of removals that will no longer be proactively removed from networks, we tend to see an increase in lawsuits for removal of” content.