Photo illustration: Allie Carl/Axios. Photo: Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/Getty Images
Lawmakers are welcoming Meta's policy changes as they gain favor with President-elect Trump, but some pushback is brewing.
Why it matters: Members from both sides of the aisle have blasted Mark Zuckerberg in the past for harmful content online, particularly for children, and these tensions could shape legislative efforts on the Hill this year.
Driving the news: Rep. Pablo José Hernández of Puerto Rico, a former Meta employee, is demanding answers from Meta following the decision to get rid of content moderators.
- In a letter shared exclusively with Axios, Hernández noted he defended Meta's fact checking program when he worked there as a public policy manager.
- Hernández asks Zuckerberg to explain his previous statement that the fact checking program "is working and people find value in the warning screens we apply to content after a fact-checking partner has rated it."
- Hernández also digs into how the new community notes approach would work, asking if Meta will continue to use warnings for content flagged as false, label it or demote it.
- The lawmaker asks whether community notes would apply to posts from political figures and government officials and how Meta would ensure Spanish-language disinformation is not exacerbated.
Another Democrat, Rep. Mike Quigley, also blasted the decision.
- "The overwhelming bipartisan consensus of the intelligence community is that unchecked misinformation on social media erodes public trust in our democratic processes," Quigley said in a statement.
Between the lines: Meta had previously touted the effectiveness of its content moderation practices as lawmakers raised concerns over the platform's impact on marginalized communities and elections.
- The policies that were in place weren't enough, according to some lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, who wanted platforms like Facebook and Instagram to be held legally liable for third-party content.
Republican champions of protecting kids online are split on Zuckerberg's decision.
- Sen. Marsha Blackburn, co-sponsor of the Kids Online Safety Act, posted that Meta's decision "is a ploy to avoid being regulated. We will not be fooled."
- In a recent Fox Business interview, Blackburn said Zuckerberg should call her office to discuss censorship and protecting kids online: "If he has been converted, if he wants to talk about how we protect people in the virtual space ... then give me a call."
House Energy and Commerce tech subcommittee Chair Gus Bilirakis said Meta's announcement "was a step in the right direction" that other Big Tech companies will hopefully follow.
- "However, there is still a great deal of important work to be done when it comes to protecting Americans' privacy and empowering parents with the necessary guardrails to keep kids safe online," said Bilirakis.
- Bilirakis co-sponsored KOSA in the House and told Axios the bill is his top priority in the new Congress.
Flashback: At a blockbuster hearing last year, Sen. Lindsey Graham told Zuckerberg he had "blood on his hands" because of the content on Meta platforms.
- Graham's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
- Blackburn late last year also said Facebook was censoring her posts regarding Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking case.
What they're saying: Meta's civil rights advisory group on Tuesday sent a letter to Zuckerberg expressing "grave concern" that the policy changes "will permit more dangerous and abusive content on its services and undermine the quality of information available to users."
What's next: Zuckerberg is planning to come to D.C. soon to meet with lawmakers, including House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan, who has long taken issue with alleged censorship of conservative speech online.
