Meta’s abandonment of independent fact-checkers will make it harder for charities to campaign and “open the floodgates to more disinformation”, digital experts have warned.

The social media giant announced this week that it was abandoning the use of independent fact-checkers on Facebook and Instagram in favour of a community notes programme, similar to the one in place on the X platform.

In a statement, Meta said: “Experts, like everyone else, have their own biases and perspectives. 

“Over time we ended up with too much content being fact-checked that people would understand to be legitimate political speech and debate.”

Meta said that starting in the US, it plans to end the current fact-checking programme in favour of a community notes programme, like the one used on X, which leaves users to comment on the accuracy of posts.

But charity experts warned the change will enable the spread of disinformation and ‘culture wars’, which could make it more difficult for charities to campaign and fundraise, as well as leaving voluntary sector staff with more moderation responsibilities.

Zoe Amar, founder of the digital consultancy Zoe Amar Digital, said: “Meta’s announcement will open the floodgates to more disinformation on Facebook and Instagram – both of which are really important channels for charities.

“The increased volume of disinformation means that it will be harder for charities to land critical messages about their campaigns, the services they offer and how people can donate to their causes.”

She added that the changes would “take the culture wars up a notch”, saying: “Charities will need to plan for how they keep their staff, volunteers and communities safe on these platforms, and decide what their role should be in challenging disinformation under the new community notes approach.”

Serena Snoad, founder of the digital consultancy Good Community, said the changes were “likely to leave charity teams facing more responsibility to moderate and keep their online spaces safe”.

Amar added that small charities, in particular, relied on these platforms to publicise their work, saying she was “especially concerned about how they will find the time – and the money – to do this”. 

Snoad said that increasing confidence in handling online challenges would be more important for charities going forward, and it might be necessary for some charities to move platforms.

“We could see a revival of niche and owned online community spaces,” she said.

Snoad said social media and community teams must be supported and equipped to do their jobs safely amid a possible increase in problematic content, saying: “As a sector, we need to rally together to share good practice and support each other.”

Kirsty Marrins, a digital communications consultant and trustee of CharityComms, said Meta’s changes were “likely to make community management just that bit harder”, and advised charities to prepare now.

She said: “Review your community guidelines and update as necessary, and make sure they are visible on your Facebook page or group. That way you can refer to them if someone goes against your community guidelines.”

Marrins added that the next step was to put together a “robust” set of frequently asked questions.

“Think of all the possible scenarios of misinformation that could affect your cause, draft your responses (involve other teams as needed) and get them signed off. 

“This means that you can reply in a timely fashion without having to wait on someone to approve your response,” said Marrins.

She said charities should also make sure there was a clear process to follow if a crisis occurred, and must invest in community management.