Meta&rsquo;s founder and CEO, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/meta-revises-policies-to-permit-mentally-ill-labels-for-lgbtq-people-8602519">Mark Zuckerberg</a>, is&nbsp;facing criticism following his recent announcement to reduce content moderation policies in the United States. 
Zuckerberg said that Meta will "get rid of fact-checkers" and replace them with community-based posts, initially in the US. He said that the fact-checking programme had led to "too many mistakes and too much censorship".
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/big-tech-bets-big-on-donald-trump-google-donates-1-mn-to-us-president-elects-inauguration-fund-8606136">Big Tech bets big on Trump: Google donates $1mn to US President-elect&rsquo;s inauguration fund</a>
<h2>Zuckerberg's censorship claims "false"</h2>
Zuckerberg claimed that fact-checkers were "too politically biased". However, the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) refuted his censorship claims, calling them "false". "We want to set the record straight, both for today's context and for the historical record," the IFCN stated.
Currently, Facebook collaborates with approximately 80 fact-checking organisations worldwide, using their services across Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. The IFCN warned that expanding Meta&rsquo;s new policy beyond the US could have dire consequences in over 100 countries where these programmes operate.
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/save-us-from-elon-musk-biographer-makes-big-claims-on-billionaires-mental-health-elon-musk-going-mad-8608103">'Save US from Elon Musk': 'Biographer' makes big claims on billionaire's mental health</a>
"Some of these countries are highly vulnerable to misinformation that spurs political instability, election interference, mob violence, and even genocide," the IFCN said. 
"If Meta decides to stop the programme worldwide, it is almost certain to result in real-world harm in many places," it added.
<h2>UN human rights chief says regulating harmful online content 'is not censorship'</h2>
On Friday, UN human rights chief Volker Tyrk stated that regulating harmful online content "is not censorship". "Allowing hate speech and harmful content online has real-world consequences. Regulating such content is not censorship," T&uuml;rk wrote on X. He further called for "accountability and governance in the digital space, in line with human rights."
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/la-wildfires-update-death-toll-climbs-to-10-curfew-in-place-amid-reports-of-looting-8607848">LA wildfires update: Death toll climbs to 10; curfew in place amid reports of looting</a>
Australian Treasurer Jim Chalmers&nbsp;said, "We&rsquo;ve seen it really explode in the last few years. It&rsquo;s a damaging development, harmful to our democracy and to people&rsquo;s mental health when they receive false information on social media," Chalmers said.
Meta first introduced its fact-checking programme after criticism of widespread disinformation on Facebook during the 2016 US presidential election. 
(With inputs from agencies)

World: Zuckerberg claimed that fact-checkers were "too politically biased". However, the International Fact-Checking Network refuted his censorship claims, calling them "false".

Meta’s founder and CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, is facing criticism following his recent announcement to reduce content moderation policies in the United States. Zuckerberg said that Meta will "get rid of fact-checkers" and replace them with community-based posts, initially in the US. He said that the fact-checking programme had led to "too many mistakes and too much censorship". Also read: Big Tech bets big on Trump: Google donates $1mn to US President-elect’s inauguration fund Zuckerberg's censorship claims "false" Zuckerberg claimed that fact-checkers were "too politically biased". However, the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) refuted his censorship claims, calling them "false". "We want to set the record straight, both for today's context and for the historical record," the IFCN stated. Currently, Facebook collaborates with approximately 80 fact-checking organisations worldwide, using their services across Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. The IFCN warned that expanding Meta’s new policy beyond the US could have dire consequences in over 100 countries where these programmes operate. Also read: 'Save US from Elon Musk': 'Biographer' makes big claims on billionaire's mental health "Some of these countries are highly vulnerable to misinformation that spurs political instability, election interference, mob violence, and even genocide," the IFCN said. "If Meta decides to stop the programme worldwide, it is almost certain to result in real-world harm in many places," it added. UN human rights chief says regulating harmful online content 'is not censorship' On Friday, UN human rights chief Volker Tyrk stated that regulating harmful online content "is not censorship". "Allowing hate speech and harmful content online has real-world consequences. Regulating such content is not censorship," Türk wrote on X. He further called for "accountability and governance in the digital space, in line with human rights." Also read: LA wildfires update: Death toll climbs to 10; curfew in place amid reports of looting Australian Treasurer Jim Chalmers said, "We’ve seen it really explode in the last few years. It’s a damaging development, harmful to our democracy and to people’s mental health when they receive false information on social media," Chalmers said. Meta first introduced its fact-checking programme after criticism of widespread disinformation on Facebook during the 2016 US presidential election. (With inputs from agencies)

International Fact-Checking Network calls out Meta CEO Zuckerberg's censorship claim as 'false'

Meta's shocking announcement that it is ending its US fact-checking program triggered scathing criticism from disinformation researchers. Watch this report for more details!

Meta replaces fact-checking with X-style community notes

Experts slam Meta's decision to end fact-checking