Mark Zuckerberg’s changes to Facebook are a gift and a danger to Christians

In a move which Mark Zuckerberg advises will “dramatically reduce the amount of censorship”, Meta, who own Facebook, Instagram and Threads, has announced its decision to withdraw independent third-party fact-checkers, starting in the US. This decision aligns with Zuckerberg’s broader plan to recommend more political content on Meta’s platforms.

The two announcements are deeply connected. Politics, perhaps more than any other topic, is fraught with misinformation, interpretation and bias. In his video statement, released last week on social media, Zuckerberg referred to the recent elections as a “cultural tipping point” and openly declared his intention to “work with President Trump to push back on governments around the world that are going after American companies and pushing to censor more.”

Belief in bias

By framing this as a step toward reducing censorship, Zuckerberg is attempting to shift the narrative. He is sidestepping the reality that it removes a layer of safeguarding, opening the door to a deluge of spin and outright falsehoods.

But who should be responsible for verifying the truth? The salaried workers checking the facts, who themselves are not free from bias? Or the consumers?

It’s important to clarify that Meta’s decision primarily affects user-generated content, particularly political content and opinions, rather than illegal or high-severity violations. The company has reiterated its commitment to addressing illegal content, such as terrorism, child sexual exploitation, drugs, fraud and scams. Zuckerberg emphasised that removing third-party fact-checkers will reduce mistakenly removed content, allowing Meta to focus on these critical areas. The change, then, is less about law enforcement and more about the battle of ideas and perspectives.

Searching for truth

For Christians, the announcement raises profound questions: Does it support or hinder freedom of religion and belief? Where does bias exist in fact-checking? Is this truly about removing censorship, or does it also relinquish safeguards? And ultimately, what is truth?

If this change allows more Christian content to reach those who need Jesus, I welcome it

The implications are complex. On the one hand, Christian voices may face less scrutiny when proclaiming the truth of the gospel. For Christian media outlets, this could mean more Christian content will be consumed across the Meta platforms as fewer posts are likely to be suppressed or demoted. The potential for sharing the good news of Christ may just have increased.

However, the issue of bias remains. This is not eradicated by removing fact-checkers; it merely shifts to the community. While this could lead to more diverse perspectives and meaningful discourse, it might equally amplify extreme viewpoints. As Zuckerberg puts it: “On platforms where billions of people can have a voice, all the good, bad, and ugly is on display. But that’s free expression.”

Developing discernment

The question of safeguarding is troubling. Framing this change as a triumph of free expression over censorship obscures the potential risks. Fact-checkers, despite their flaws, provide a layer of protection - especially for younger or more impressionable audiences. Without them, discernment becomes a critical skill for all users, one that we must actively cultivate.

This brings us to the heart of the matter: truth. In his announcement, Zuckerberg stated that it was never Meta’s role to be “arbiters of truth.” This admission is, in some ways, encouraging. But with no fact-checkers, the responsibility for discerning truth now falls squarely on those of us who engage with social media.

Fact-checkers provide a layer of protection - especially for younger audiences

For Christians, this presents both a challenge and an opportunity. It requires us to be diligent, testing the accuracy of the content we consume and share. It also demands that we confront our own biases. How often have we used a Bible verse out of context to support our viewpoint? How frequently do we share content that aligns with our perspective without verifying its truth?

My husband and I often reflect on how our children’s education differs from ours. In a world where information is just a Google search away, the ability to memorise facts is no longer paramount. Students don’t need to know when the Battle of Hastings was - they can find that fact online in under a second. Instead, their success will depend on their ability to discern truth amid a sea of data.

Opportunity knocks

Personally, I am not overly troubled by the removal of independent fact-checkers. I have never relied on them extensively and, if this change allows more Christian content to reach those who need Jesus, I welcome it.

What concerns me more is how we, as a community, hold one another accountable to biblical truth – and how we teach our young people to discern it. Our call is to become a wise and discerning people who seek to know and live out God’s truth, rather than propagating our own version of it.

As Zuckerberg concluded, it is time to focus on “getting back to our roots about giving people voice.” For Christians, the charge is clear: How will we use our voice and how will we wisely discern the voices of others?