Meta executive slams CEO Mark Zuckerberg for ‘yielding to political pressure’

A senior Meta exec blasted CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s decision to halt fact-checking on Facebook, Instagram and Threads, saying the social media mogul is “bowing to political pressure” before the president-elect takes office Donald Trump.

The comments from Michael McConnell, co-chair of Meta’s Oversight Board, come as Zuckerberg’s abrupt shift to relax content moderation policies and remove censorship has sparked unease among advertisers who fear a resurgence of harmful content and misinformation.

McConnell expressed dismay at the move, describing it as a potential concession to partisanship.

“I would have liked to see these reforms presented in a less controversial and partisan time, so that they were considered on their merits,” McConnell told National Public Radio on Friday.

He warned that the move could be seen as a sign that Meta is “bowing to political pressure” – a reference to Zuckerberg’s efforts to curry favor with Trump.

His comments echoed those made by Meta employees on the company’s internal discussion forum.

Several other tech titans, such as Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Apple CEO Tim Cook and Google CEO Sundar Pichai, have sought Trump’s ear in recent weeks as he prepares to take the oath next Monday.

According to McConnell, neither he nor the board were informed in advance of the policy change.

However, sources familiar with the matter told The New York Times that Meta executives reportedly briefed officials in the Trump camp before the public announcement.

The Post has reached out to Meta for comment.

The Oversight Board, which was established in May 2020, is a quasi-independent committee of experts in law, human rights, journalism and technology that reviews content removal decisions and makes policy recommendations regarding the moderation of certain content.

Meanwhile, the decision to end the platform’s fact-checking program and reduce restrictions on hate speech raises questions about brand safety on the $1.5 trillion tech giant’s platforms, which generate majority of their $135 billion in annual revenue from advertising.

“Some brands will already be carefully evaluating their plans, and this will undoubtedly become a commercial headache for both parties,” Fergus McCallum, CEO of advertising agency TBWA/MCR, told the Financial Times.

Risk-averse advertisers are reluctant to lift restrictions on politically sensitive topics like immigration and gender.

Lou Paskalis, CEO of marketing consultancy AJL Advisory, told the FT that the change “creates headwinds for marketers”, leading some to “reduce their reliance” on Meta.

While some advertisers remain cautious, others believe that the platform’s performance indicators will ultimately determine their response.

“The cold, hard truth is that advertisers will only care if it hurts their numbers,” Alex Cheeseman, business head at Outbrain, told the FT.

“If performance remains stable, no one will lose sleep wondering ‘where’ or ‘how’ their ads will show.”

Meta announced Tuesday that it would phase out its fact-checking program, introduced to combat the spread of misinformation on its platforms.

Zuckerberg justified the move as part of a broader strategy to promote “free speech,” describing the 2024 election as a “cultural tipping point” that necessitated change.

“It’s time to return to our roots around free speech,” Zuckerberg said in his announcement.

He admitted that the old policy had led to “too many errors and too much censorship” and that the new approach would rely on users to correct incorrect information, similar to the “Community Notes” feature of x.

While acknowledging that the new system would “detect fewer bad things,” Zuckerberg argued that it would also reduce the unintentional removal of legitimate posts and accounts.

“We will also reduce the number of posts and accounts of innocent people that we accidentally delete,” he said.

Critics, including McConnell, have expressed skepticism about the new approach’s effectiveness. “

“I’m not really sure that’s the solution. There really is no silver bullet to this problem,” McConnell said.

He also called the timing of the announcement and its optics “bad,” suggesting it could be seen as in line with political agendas.

The move follows a series of actions by Zuckerberg that critics have linked to Trump’s influence.

Zuckerberg reportedly dined with Trump at Mar-a-Lago in November and donated $1 million to Trump’s inauguration.

Last Monday, Zuckerberg announced the addition of Dana White, a Trump ally, to Meta’s board of directors.

In his interview with Joe Rogan on Friday, Zuckerberg revealed that Biden administration officials pressured Meta to remove posts questioning COVID-19 vaccines. The Meta boss described heated interactions with White House officials who “yelled” and “sworn at” company executives.

As Meta moves away from fact-checking, questions remain about the platform’s ability to combat misinformation while promoting free speech.

With the 2024 election cycle already underway, this decision has reignited debates about the role of technology companies in the management of political content and the fine line between moderation and censorship.

For now, Meta will rely on its user base to help it report and combat misinformation.