Deven a journalistic format in its own right, fact-checking developed in the early 2000s in the United States thanks to the Internet and under the impetus of media keen to confront the words of political figures with reality, like the site PolitiFactlaunched in 2007 and winner of the Pulitzer Prize in 2009.
Correction of figures live on television, online articles crossed out with the words true or false… the method spread all over the world, until the shift that occurred in 2016 with the election of Donald Trump and Brexit.
Pointed out because of the flood of false information and conspiracy theories on social networks, web giants like Meta then encouraged the growth of verification programs beyond the political sphere. They relied on media who saw it as a welcome financial windfall in a difficult economic context.
Ten organizations are affected by Meta’s announcement, which at this stage only concerns the United States. Some are totally dependent on the tech giant, like Check Your Fact, reports the American media Business Insider. Other entities seem more sheltered, including PolitiFact : it derives a little more than 5% of its revenues from the partnership with Meta, according to New York Times.
Agence France-Presse is on the front line globally. She participates in more than 26 languages in a Meta program which pays more than 80 media outlets around the world to use their “fact-checks” on Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp. “We are currently assessing the situation”, indicates the agency’s management.
The issue is sensitive in Africa. “Business models are more or less dependent on Facebook“, as Africa Check based in Johannesburg or other media which have launched often with the objective of integrating this program (Data Check in Cameroon, Balobaki Check in the DRC, TogoChecketc.), quotes Laurent Bigot, assessor at the IFCN.
And to warn, in the event of an end to financing by Meta on this continent: “This verification work will never be done elsewhere. However, disinformation kills every day in these countries.”
In support of his dramatic decision, Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg claimed that “fact-checkers have been too politically oriented and have done more to reduce trust than to improve it, particularly in the United States”. So, “we are restoring free expression on our platforms”, he asserted.
-Owner of
However, retorted Angie Holan, director of the IFCN network bringing together 137 organizations, this journalism “has never censored or removed posts”. “Fact-checkers add information and context to controversial claims” in “following non-partisan and transparent principles”, she recalled.
Towards a “world without facts”?
Pressure or even threats on digital investigation teams often increase during electoral periods, as was the case in 2024 in India, South Korea or Croatia. With Meta’s new policy, the NGO Reporters Without Borders is concerned about a “anti-journalistic headlong rush”.
Filipino journalist and Nobel Peace Prize winner Maria Ressa is alarmed: Facebook will, according to her, “allowing lies, anger, fear and hatred to infect every person on the platform” and this could lead, ultimately, to a “world without facts”.
L’expert Laurent Bigot nuance : “Meta’s announcement only puts an end to an abnormal situation”. Car “the platforms convey a maximum of disinformation and buy a good conscience with this type of programs”, according to this lecturer in information and communication sciences at the French University of Tours.
The French daily Liberation stopped its partnership with Meta in 2021. Head of its Checknews section, Cédric Mathiot considers that such contracts can constitute “an economic crutch that does good” and, at the same time, who “perhaps prevents” of “revitalize” the fact-checking process. Without Meta, “paradoxically, this can push fact-checking to be more ambitious”, with in-depth investigations and themes “more varied”, he argues.
Related News :