A recent article puts a major focus on an issue that’s been simmering for weeks. Meta’s advertisers must deal with the social-media company’s announcement this month that it will no longer “fact-check” posts. We will now be subjected to a lot more misinformation and bigotry. It’s a crisis for both the advertisers and, we would argue, Meta itself.

The lengthy article was posted on The Wall Street Journal’s site Jan. 25 (it’s in the Jan. 27 print edition). It spotlights recent meetings Meta execs have had with advertisers, seeking to mollify them about CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s Jan. 7 announcement that Meta’s Facebook and Instagram will loosen their speech restrictions.

This is all tied up with Donald Trump’s re-election as U.S. president. In making the announcement, Zuckerberg (pictured) said the election was a “cultural tipping point.” This month Meta also appointed to its board Trump friend and Ultimate Fighting Championship CEO Dana White.

Reputation Fears

The advertisers fear hits to their reputations from having their promotions near posts and articles hailing, say, Naziism, terrorism or racism. Meta has been counseling them on how to avoid having their spots next to misinformation or offensive speech, according to the WSJ.

“In terms of brand safety, we are 100 percent committed,” Meta ad executive Samantha Stetson told advertisers on a Jan. 17 call, according to the WSJ, citing a recording of the call. At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, this month, Meta Head of Global Business Group Nicola Mendelsohn said the promoters would still be able to prevent their plugs from being placed near offending content.

For our purposes, the issue is fascinating because it emphasizes two important considerations: crisis and reputation. It’s encouraging that these brands are showing such concern for their reps. Also and obviously, the best way to deal with a crisis is to avoid one. In addition, it’s a crisis for Meta because the company will have to deal with continued grumbling from both advertisers and users.

Policing Language

Zuckerberg’s announcement was a jolt because Meta’s policy over the years has been to move more and more in the direction of policing language. The CEO said the fact-checkers “destroyed more trust than they created.” We’re not sure what that means. In any event, the company will now have its users do the policing through crowdsourced “Community Notes,” similar to what competitor X (formerly Twitter) does.

This is serious stuff. Last year, X sued the World Federation of Advertisers and member companies Unilever, Mars, CVS Health and Orsted, accusing them of violating antitrust laws with a “massive advertiser boycott” over brand safety. X has since dropped Unilever from the suit but, according to the WSJ, plans to add other advertisers.

Photo Credit: Frederic Legrand – COMEO/Shutterstock