Meta ends fact checking - Zuch promises free speech

I have long seen this issue raised, but it used to feel like more of an academic jab at someone as opposed to being part of a substantive argument about anything. Perhaps it ties into why some Republicans are very emphatic about using the phrase Democrat Party instead of Democratic Party.

 

Zuck bringin' the pain...

Mark Zuckerberg says Biden officials would 'scream' and 'curse' when seeking removal of Facebook content
The Meta CEO said on a podcast that administration officials had asked the company to remove certain posts, including "things that are true."

On an episode of "The Joe Rogan Experience" released Friday, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg painted a picture of Biden administration officials berating Facebook staff during requests to remove certain content from the social media platform.

"Basically, these people from the Biden administration would call up our team and, like, scream at them and curse," Zuckerberg told podcast host and comedian Joe Rogan. "It just got to this point where we were like, 'No, we're not gonna, we're not gonna take down things that are true. That's ridiculous.'"

The White House did not immediately respond to NBC News’ request for comment about Zuckerberg’s remarks.

Mark Zuckerberg says Biden officials would 'scream' and 'curse' when seeking removal of Facebook content

 

It's rather obvious why Zuckerberg ended fact checking. Within a few weeks after Trump takes office this will disappear.
Meta will face antitrust trial over Instagram, WhatsApp acquisitions

 

Sorry loser. Never getting me back. Will say a little prayer every day for the complete and utter destruction of FB and Zucc.

 

And when the D's get back in power, he'll flip again. The guy is a spineless jellyfish of a human being.

 

It is almost like big businesses learned from the Mortgage Crisis and the TARP program, that any deal you make with the federal government, the federal government can come back and change the rules on you at any time. Thus, it is important to be in good with the party in power.

The Fanjuls, of American Sugar, learned this a long time ago. Alfy is the brother that works with Democrats and Pepe is the brother that works with Republicans. They have their bases covered no matter who is in power.

 

Ironically, now it’s X that’s anal with “community notes.”

 

That deserves its own thread IMO. That should be shouted from the rooftops for every American to know the true nature of the DNC and how they operate.

 

They definitely laid the foundation. Kochs play both sides too. And a lot of others. Its the smart play in an openly pay-to-play system.

 

There was a SCOTUS case that touched on it.

 

I'm sure MAGA will be much more polite when they ask for their boot licking.

 

They claim a monopoly on censorship disguised as fact checking and these morons buy it. Unbelievable! They will believe anything that the democrats tell them. They are just a bunch of sheep acting like they know everything. It is quite entertaining to watch.

 

I don't think sites like Politifact and Factcheck claim to be the left at all. What happens is that many on the right label a lot of factchecking as coming from the left.

 

Most “fact checking” comes from the left. This is why they are up in arms when “fact checkers” are let go. They lose control of the narrative.

 

It is interesting that you are conflating factual vs. non-factual with left vs. right. That is telling...

 

Explain to me which party is more concerned with “fact checking” and maybe you will actually see the truth. There is a reason it is going away. Have you heard the latest interviews with Zuckerberg? He lays it all out for you. Try again.

 

Yes, it does seem that one party is more concerned with factual accuracy than the other. Perhaps you should reflect on why only one party cares about verifiable facts and the other doesn't.

 

Because one party believes in free speech and the other does not. Explain to me how “fact checkers” which Zuckerberg himself said were partisan, allows the truth to be told. I’ll wait.

 

In this instance, is "free speech" a weird euphemism for lying? Having somebody say that what you said is not factual is not antithetical to free speech. In fact, it is a pretty crucial usage of free speech.

Is "truth" some sort of weird euphemism for "non-factual?"