How will Meta’s policy changes affect European users? 

On 7 January 2025, Meta announced six significant changes to its policies that will affect user safety across all its platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, and Threads.  According to Meta’s Chief Global Affairs Officer, Joel Kaplan, changes to fact-checking and proactive enforcement will be “expanded beyond the US” in time. In addition, Kaplan also said that changes to Meta’s hate speech policies announced on January 7th “have been implemented worldwide immediately”. 

Our report More Transparency and Less Spin demonstrates that these changes are a huge step backwards in Meta’s efforts to address hate and misinformation. In the EU this could compromise areas the DSA is designed to protect, such as civic discourse, electoral processes, gender-based violence, and fundamental rights. For Europe’s users these massive changes will simply mean more hate and misinformation on their feeds. 

How could Meta’s policy changes negatively impact EU users? 

1. Meta will halt proactive enforcement (including automatic detection) for some types of harmful content, instead acting only in response to user reports. 

Meta’s announcement only preserves proactive enforcement for terrorism, child sexual exploitation, drugs, fraud and scams. 

Meta has not stated if proactive enforcement will continue for other policy areas. At risk of being dropped from proactive enforcement are: Bullying & Harassment, Dangerous Organized Hate, Suicide and Self-Injury, Violence & Graphic Content. 

2. Meta could halt 97% of enforcement in these policy areas, which last year represented nearly 277 million pieces of harmful content worldwide.

According to CCDH analysis of global transparency data released Meta, over 97% of Meta’s enforcement actions in policy areas at risk of being dropped were “proactive”, with less than 3% made in response to user reports. 

Even accounting for Meta’s claims about mistakes in proactive enforcement, Meta correctly acted on nearly 277 million pieces of content in policy areas now at risk of being dropped from proactive enforcement. 

3. Meta is dropping policies on “immigration, gender identity and gender” 

Meta is dropping policies on “immigration, gender identity and gender”, with leaked internal guidance suggesting it will now permit statements such as:  

• “Gays are not normal.” 
• “Women are crazy.” 
• “Trans people aren’t real. They’re mentally ill.” 
• “Immigrants are grubby, filthy pieces of shit.” 
• “Black people are more violent than Whites” 
• “Jews are flat out greedier than Christians.” 

4. Community notes vs. fact-checking 

Fact-check org, Fundación Maldita, warn that in the first half of 2024, independent fact-checkers on Meta’s platforms tagged 31 million posts with fact-checking articles. 

The shift from moderation and independent fact-checking to Community Notes (with an EU rollout expected) raises questions about overall integrity of information. Mark Zuckerberg said “we’ve seen this approach work on X”—In our report Rated Not Helpful CCDH analysed shortcomings in X’s Community Notes, showing how it fell short and was not a replacement for moderation. 

How this impacts the EU Digital Services Act (DSA): 

Systemic risks increase 

• Gender-based Violence & Fundamental Rights: Meta dropping of policies on gender, gender identity and immigration directly impact Meta’s ability to counter the systemic risk to gender-based violence and fundamental rights, specifically the right to non-discrimination. 
• Civil discourse and electoral processes: Reduced proactive measures, combined with the eventual phasing out of EU fact-checking, could lead to a surge in harmful content and misinformation at a time when democracy faces unprecedented threats online. Both changes contradict recommendations in the Commission’s DSA election guidelines which were designed to reflect industry best practices which Meta was leading the way on. 

Moderation changes in conflict with DSA provisions 

The DSA’s Article 14 mandates that platforms enforce their content moderation rules in a diligent, objective, and proportionate manner. Meta’s planned cuts to proactive enforcement, previously responsible for over 97% of actions against key types of harmful content, renders it highly unlikely that it will continue to meet these standards, significantly compromising its ability to protect EU users. 

Meta’s own analysis as part of its transparency reporting sets out how its so-called ‘problem areas’ align with Article 34 (1) systemic risks (see below figure 1). By their own analysis, Meta’s dropping of proactive enforcement could affect six out of the DSA’s eight systemic risks. 

What should Europe’s elected representatives do in response to Meta’s policy changes? 

1. Demand clarity from Meta on enforcement changes in the EU 

Meta must clearly specify which content categories will lose proactive enforcement given that proactive measures currently catch over 97% of harmful content in key categories where Meta has not specified that proactive enforcement will continue. Transparency is essential for assessing DSA compliance, particularly the requirement under Article 14 for diligent, objective, and proportionate moderation. 

2. Insist on continued proactive enforcement in the EU 

Proactive enforcement has proven effective in mitigating systemic risks, accounting for 97% of Meta’s enforcement actions in policy areas at risk of being dropped. EU policy makers should insist that Meta maintain these practices in the EU to ensure that it meets its obligations under the DSA and protects EU citizens. 

3. Call for continuing independent fact-checking in the EU 

The planned phase-out of independent fact-checking, which in H1 2024 tagged 31 million posts with fact-checking alerts, will severely weaken efforts to combat disinformation and protect public health and civil discourse. The EU must demand that Meta continues to collaborate with independent fact-checkers rather than relying solely on Community Notes. 

4. Rally for DSA compliance 

MEPs should unite in asserting that, if implemented as announced, Meta’s changes will risk non-compliance with the DSA and will endanger the areas that European elected representatives have pledged to protect including fundamental rights, civil discourse & elections and gender-based violence.

EU policy makes must keep holding Mark Zuckerberg’s company accountable 

Meta’s proposed changes represent a significant departure from its current enforcement practices and threaten the safeguards established by the DSA. Scaling back proactive enforcement risks breaching the diligent moderation required by Article 14, leaving harmful content largely unchecked.  

Simultaneously, ending independent fact-checking in the EU will dismantle a critical defence against disinformation, threatening information integrity in the EU. This potentially toxic combination of rollbacks threatens EU values, and the Article 34 (1) systemic risks set out by legislators.  

EU policy makers must act decisively to ensure that Meta remains accountable and compliant with the DSA, protecting European citizens and their fundamental rights.