## Colophon tags:: url:: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/01/eff-statement-metas-announcement-revisions-its-content-moderation-processes date:: [[]] %% title:: EFF Statement on Meta's Announcement of Revisions to Its Content Moderation Processes type:: [[clipped-note]] author:: [[@eff.org]] %% ## Notes > We applaud Meta’s efforts to try to fix its over-censorship problem but will watch closely to make sure it is a good-faith effort and rolled out fairly and not merely a political maneuver to accommodate the upcoming U.S. administration change. — [view in context](https://hyp.is/BdoiVs4uEe-BjFum_0SEww/www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/01/eff-statement-metas-announcement-revisions-its-content-moderation-processes) - Annotation: I would have stopped short of applauding it, but otherwise, I think this is a reasonable take. > We encourage social media companies to employ a variety of non-censorship tools to address problematic speech on their platforms and fact-checking can be one of those tools. Community notes, essentially crowd-sourced fact-checking, can be a very valuable tool for addressing misinformation and potentially give greater control to users. But fact-checking by professional organizations with ready access to subject-matter expertise can be another. This has proved especially true in international contexts where they have been instrumental in refuting, for example, genocide denial. — [view in context](https://hyp.is/Wp3GRM4uEe-ZYg8XOUWaqA/www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/01/eff-statement-metas-announcement-revisions-its-content-moderation-processes) - Annotation: My sense is that both need to work in parallel. There is a broader question of sustainability that will always remain if the programme's remain funded by Meta. > We applaud Meta’s efforts to try to fix its over-censorship problem but will watch closely to make sure it is a good-faith effort and rolled out fairly and not merely a political maneuver to accommodate the upcoming U.S. administration change. — [view in context](https://hyp.is/BdoiVs4uEe-BjFum_0SEww/www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/01/eff-statement-metas-announcement-revisions-its-content-moderation-processes) - Annotation: I would have stopped short of applauding it, but otherwise, I think this is a reasonable take.> We encourage social media companies to employ a variety of non-censorship tools to address problematic speech on their platforms and fact-checking can be one of those tools. Community notes, essentially crowd-sourced fact-checking, can be a very valuable tool for addressing misinformation and potentially give greater control to users. But fact-checking by professional organizations with ready access to subject-matter expertise can be another. This has proved especially true in international contexts where they have been instrumental in refuting, for example, genocide denial. — [view in context](https://hyp.is/Wp3GRM4uEe-ZYg8XOUWaqA/www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/01/eff-statement-metas-announcement-revisions-its-content-moderation-processes) - Annotation: My sense is that both need to work in parallel. There is a broader question of sustainability that will always remain if the programme's remain funded by Meta.