By The Spring 2025 Media Dilemma Students
In an age where misinformation spreads rapidly online, fact-checking has become a critical issue, raising debates about its role in protecting the truth while balancing free speech, which is a topic explored in these articles written by our Media Dilemma’s class.
Holding Social Media Accountable for the Truth
By Emily Ammon
In today’s digital age, misinformation spreads faster than ever, and social media platforms have become a hotspot for false claims.
A recent article in The New York Times questions whether social media companies should be held accountable for fact-checking the content user’s post.
With millions of posts shared daily, it’s clear that these platforms play a key role in determining what information people are exposed to. But should they be responsible for verifying it?
The need for accurate information online has never been more pressing.
According to a Pew Research Center poll, 59% of Americans say they encounter false or misleading information on social media regularly.
Social media companies are well-equipped to spot and prevent this misinformation, but many have fallen short in policing content.
“It’s not just about flagging content, it’s about creating systems to verify the truth,” said expert Dr. Susan Smith in the New York Times article.
Opponents argue that forcing platforms to fact-check could violate free speech, leading to censorship.
But when misinformation leads to real-world harm such as the spread of health-related deceptions or election interference platforms must act.
Ultimately, fact-checking should be a shared responsibility between users, social media companies, and external organizations.
Social media companies need to adopt stronger strategies to safeguard the public from the risks of misinformation, ensuring users have access to trustworthy, verified content.
Social media fact checking, does it hinder our freedom of speech?
By Emma Bernatowicz
Is fact checking really hindering our freedom of speech? Meta thinks so and is even getting rid of it all together.
One crucial part to the First Amendment of the Constitution is freedom of speech. Via the evolution of social media platforms, freedom of speech has been able to flourish, and people have been able to further express themselves.
But because of the evolution of social media, companies have had to instill fact-checking systems to ensure their users are getting accurate information.
In light of Donald Trump’s election victory, Meta announced that they will be getting rid of their third-party fact checkers on Facebook and rely on the feedback of their users.
As reported in the New York Times, “It’s time to get back to our roots around free expression,” Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s chief executive, said in a video announcing the changes.
The company’s fact-checking system, he added, had “reached a point where it’s just too many mistakes and too much censorship.” While there is an argument that getting rid of fact-checking will be beneficial to society, I think there needs to be a look into the greater consequences that can and will be faced by the public.
Though people like-minded to Zuckerburg believe fact-checking hinders their freedom of speech, others find that fact-checking is essential to stop the spread of misinformation.
Although there can be the argument that fact-checking has led to censorship, the use and practice of fact-checking has improved the information that people are consuming.
People are influenced by different forms of bias and often can’t decipher true or false because of that.
While Meta is getting rid of their fact-checking system, this doesn’t mean that it’s the right way to ensure a user-friendly platform.
Why Fact-Checking Matters More Than Ever
By Ryan Butler
In 2020, a viral post spread across social media claiming mail-in ballots were “rigged.” Before fact-checkers could weigh in, millions had already seen it, shared it, and started forming opinions based on false information.
This is the world we live in now, where misinformation moves faster than the truth and sometimes shapes the way people think before the facts are even out.
A Pew Research Center study found that nearly two-thirds of Americans feel overwhelmed by the amount of false or misleading information out there.
While a lot of it comes from random social media posts, news outlets aren’t off the hook either.
In 2021, major media organizations mistakenly reported that Border Patrol agents were “whipping” migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border before later admitting the claim wasn’t true.
When the rush to be first outweighs the responsibility to be right, trust in the media takes a hit.
Good journalism should be about getting the facts straight, not just getting the story out fast. Outlets like PolitiFact and FactCheck.org show how it should be done by taking the time to verify information and correct mistakes when necessary.
However, this isn’t just on journalists. We all have a role to play.
Pausing before sharing, checking sources, and looking past clickbait headlines can make a huge difference.
Misinformation isn’t going to stop on its own.
If we want the truth to matter, we have to slow down, ask questions, and think before we hit share.
Proper Fact Checking
By Bryan Avanzato
In an era where information spreads faster than ever, fact-checking has become an essential safeguard against misinformation. The internet and social media platforms have democratized information, allowing anyone to share news and opinions instantly.
While this has its benefits, it has also led to the rapid spread of false or misleading information, often without verification.
Fact-checking is crucial because misinformation can have real-world consequences. Whether it’s false claims about health treatments, distorted political narratives, or misleading financial advice, unchecked misinformation can sway public opinion, fuel division, and even endanger lives.
Without reliable fact-checking, people are more susceptible to manipulation by bad actors who exploit misinformation for personal or political gain.
The responsibility of fact-checking doesn’t rest solely on journalists and media organizations. Every individual has a role to play in verifying the information they consume and share.
Simple steps like cross-referencing sources, checking publication dates, and identifying credible news outlets can help prevent the spread of false information.
Organizations dedicated to fact-checking, such as Snopes and PolitiFact, also play a vital role in debunking false claims.
Ultimately, fostering a culture of critical thinking and fact-checking strengthens democracy, public trust, and informed decision-making.
In a world where misinformation is abundant, truth remains our most powerful tool. By committing to verifying facts before spreading information, we contribute to a more informed and responsible society.
A Crisis of Misinformation within Facebook
By Lauren Deibert
In an era where misinformation spreads faster than light, Facebook has become a battleground for fact-checking.
While the platform claims to combat false information, its efforts often fall short, allowing misleading content to shape public opinion and fuel political division.
Facebook has fact-checkers to flag false information, but its approach is inconsistent rather than preventive.
Some argue fact-checking suppresses free speech, while others criticize Facebook for failing to remove harmful information.
One big issue is the platform’s algorithm, which prioritizes engagement over accuracy. Content, often misleading or outright false, tends to generate more likes, shares, and comments, making it more visible.
Even when flagged, false posts can continue circulating, as fact-check banners are often ignored or dismissed by users.
Critics of social media argue that Facebook must do more.
Transparency in its fact-checking process, stronger penalties for repeat spam, and adjustments to its algorithm to prioritize accuracy over virality are crucial steps forward.
Facebook users must play a role by critically evaluating posts and reporting misleading content. Fact-checking on Facebook shouldn’t be an afterthought.
This should be the responsibility of the social media platform itself.
Otherwise, misinformation will continue to thrive, with dangerous consequences for the government and public well-being.
Fact Checking: Should It End or Stay as a Convenience for Users?
By Breanna Canada
While looking at things we see on the internet today, especially the things we see on social media, it is important for viewers to know the difference between what is factual and what is not true.
Recently, Meta, which is the company that owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, decided to end their fact checking program that they use within their social media platforms. As a result of this, there are now many concerns about things that can be put onto these platforms from this point on.
Knowing that at this point there are many people who can spread negative or false information on social media, it is important to understand that fact checking plays a major role in holding people accountable for what they share in the media and pointing others in the right direction when it comes to obtaining accurate knowledge.
Fact Checking should not be discontinued and should proceed to be the resource that keeps information accurate within the social media platforms.
Within most platforms, there are large spreads of false information that have been misleading to many people, therefore making it a priority for them to have reliable sources of information at their fingertips.
Within this New York Times article titled “Meta to End Fact-Checking Program in Shift Ahead of Trump Term”, it illustrates Meta’s overall motive to discontinue their fact checking program, it also highlights how this decision has been looked at from a negative and worrying standpoint.
Nicole Gill, who is a founder of the digital watchdog organization Accountable Tech, expressed how she feels as though Mr. Zuckerburg, the CEO of Meta was “reopening the floodgates to the exact same surge of hate, disinformation and conspiracy that cause Jan. 6 riot – and that continue to spur real life violence.”.
This shows that without a proper fact checking system, platforms may be exposed to information that will not keep people safe, due to outside influences that pressure them to only focus on making money.
Some may argue that the discontinuation of fact checking will open opportunities for free expression, that will allow those who innocently make posts to not have their content accidentally taken down.
However, even though freedom of speech should be considered, it should also be balanced with the responsibility of stopping false information being spread. Overall, avoiding fact checking can cause many issues within the media and our society.
Meta’s decision to discontinue their fact checking program is something that can be very concerning for a lot of people.
It is important to enforce a sense of structure within these social media platforms in order to protect us from false information.
As social media continues to shape public perception, the articles from our Media Dilemma’s class highlight the ongoing debate over fact-checking, emphasizing the need for accuracy, accountability, and the protection of both truth and expression.
