Meta’s fact-checking shutdown sparks fears of disinfo crisis in Balkans 

Meta’s abrupt decision to halt its third party fact-checking programme signals a global retreat from combating disinformation and potentially leaving regions like the Balkans exposed even more to unchecked online manipulation and political influence campaigns.

Although the official announcement on January 7 referred to the termination of the program in the US, so far there is no reason to believe that halting the third party fact-checking programme will only happen in the US which left the local Balkan fact checkers concern about the future – and financial sustainability – of their activities. Meta’s decision may not yet directly affect its fact-checking programmes in the Balkans but it sets a worrying precedent. 

Meta’s decision to end fact-checking in the US

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced ending the US fact-checking program in favor of a crowdsourced “community notes” system, inspired by platform X. He cited the recent US presidential election as a “cultural tipping point” for prioritising free speech and criticised governments and legacy media for promoting censorship.

Globally, Meta stated it relies on independent fact-checkers certified by the IFCN or EFCSN to combat misinformation on Facebook, Instagram, and Threads. “Fact-checkers verify information, while we inform users when content is rated,” the press release explained.

The third-party program, launched in the Balkans in 2019, faced mixed reactions, including criticism for bias and neglecting core issues. Concerns now arise that its potential shutdown could undermine efforts against disinformation, with studies highlighting Meta’s struggles with non-English content moderation in the region.

Vesna Rajkovic Nenadic, media analyst and educator, and media literacy trainer in the Balkans for the past ten years, said that if this decision were eventually applied to the region, it would undoubtedly have some impact on fact-checking organisations, particularly those that secured a large part of their funding through such programs.

“At this moment, as I interpret this decision, it is unclear whether it will apply to Europe or only to the United States. In Montenegro, there has been no reaction so far. On the other hand, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, for instance, fact-checking organisations believe it does not affect them and have announced they will continue their work.

Asked about previous effect of the program funded by Meta in the region, Rajkovic Nenadic said that research shows that only two per cent of citizens in Montenegro are aware of the platform Raskrinkavanje (one of the platform part of the third party fact checking programme in Montenegro) 

“I think this is the best response. While the program undoubtedly had certain benefits, in Montenegro, for example, it primarily focused on news from regional tabloids and content published by specific groups on social media, marked as fake news or disinformation,” she said. 

Meta’s decision, though not yet impacting fact-checking programs outside the US, sets a concerning precedent. Balkan fact-checking organisations, heavily reliant on Meta’s funding, may face financial strain, risking downsizing or closure, especially with Facebook’s dominance in the region.

According to their official financial statements, most of those Balkan fact checking organisations have been earning at least 200,000 EUR per year from commercial contracts with Meta. 

In an open letter to Mark Zuckerberg from the world’s fact-checkers published on January 9, they warn of a setback for accuracy online and potential global consequences.

The letter was also signed by a number of fact checking organisations implementing the third party programme in the Balkans – Raskrinkavanje in Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slovenia and Montenegro, Metamorphosis in North Macedonia, Istinomer in Serbia and Istinomjer in Bosnia, Internews in Kosovo, Faktoje in Albania and and Faktograf in Croatia. 

Meta’s decision, they warned, threatens nearly a decade of progress in promoting accurate online information. The program aimed to inform users about false claims without censoring, supporting freedom of expression, as reiterated in last year’s Sarajevo statement. 

The freedom to say why something is not true is also free speech

Addressing criticism, they wrote, “The program has not been a tool to censor or politically biased. We want to set the record straight for today and the historical record.” 

More disinfo and misinfo 

Media experts across Europe warn that Meta’s decision undermines platforms’ commitment to combating misinformation and may discourage similar initiatives. Zuckerberg’s claim of fact-checking being “politically biased” risks global reputational damage and the withdrawal of Facebook funding for fact-checking organisations.

Balkan media experts warn that labeling fact-checkers as biased gives autocratic leaders “dangerous ammunition” to discredit them. With Meta stepping back from fact-checking, harmful pro-Russian propaganda and disinformation may spread more widely on social media.

The study Monitoring Influence and Disinformation Campaigns in the Western Balkans highlights that while disinformation is often linked to foreign actors, regional politicians and media play a key role, fueling anti-EU sentiment. Anti-Western messages made up over 60% of content analysed, with pro-Kremlin sentiment at 24% across TV, newspapers, websites, and social media channels.

The Balkan Free Media Initiative (BFMI), a Brussels-based independent media watchdog, is concerned that Meta’s decision if implemented in the Balkans threatens to open the floodgates to unchecked misinformation and disinformation in the region. It also urged Meta to reconsider and restore their fact-checking initiatives. 

“The BFMI has previously highlighted how social media platforms used in the Balkans often amplify pro-Russian propaganda and pro-Serbian disinformation. With Meta stepping away from fact-checking, these harmful narratives may spread faster and further,” the organisation said. 

“Without fact-checking, platforms risk becoming megaphones for divisive and harmful content, threatening peace, democracy, and media freedom in the Balkans,” BFMI said. 

Would the X-style community notes work in the Balkans 

Media experts noted flaws in X’s community notes system, which Meta plans to adopt, citing widespread errors. According to GlobalData’s piece published on January 20, relying on group opinions often fails to ensure factual accuracy. Verification is slow, requiring agreement from diverse perspectives before a note is implemented.

“As for Meta’s Community Notes, which is an innovative tool on the social network X (formerly Twitter) that allows users to add additional information to potentially misleading posts, I believe there is a serious risk that this idea could backfire. Why? Giving such a tool to users—some of whom lack sufficient knowledge while others are on these platforms precisely to spread such content – can be dangerous,” Rajkovic Nenadic said. . 

“The intention is not for platforms to remove controversial content themselves. It’s difficult, especially in smaller markets, to reach administrators about harmful content,” Rajkovic Nenadic explained. 

She noted that media organisations lead regional efforts against disinformation, but these depend on short-term projects. 

“In schools, few students choose media literacy, even though it’s mandatory to offer it,” she added. Montenegro’s Media Strategy designates its regulator as the lead for media literacy, but she questioned its effectiveness, emphasising the need for both long-term efforts and immediate solutions.

Source of the cover photo: Skorzewiak via Depositphotos

---