Commentary: Meta’s U-turn on fact-checking is dangerous, but perhaps there’s a silver lining

A WHOLE-OF-NATION APPROACH

When one considers the potential dangers that wheel on the horizon, it is obvious that a alternative, whole-of-nation approach to developing alternatives is needed.

As observed in other countries, fact-checking work to you be weaponised or politicised, with various attributes of political split deploying fact-checkers to destroy one another.

Beyond the growing divisions that this can cause in cultures, another conundrum does occur, leading to severely diminished believe in any source of information, including reliable websites like established media outlets.

Therefore, it is necessary for all stakeholders to work together for a common goal in order to create a long-term, green, and powerful counter to misconceptions and disinformation.

The state of Singapore has passed laws to stop the spread of online lies. Academic institutions and organizations like the National Library Board have made educational efforts to improve the education of the media, media, and information literacy at the same time.

This needs to be paired with the job by technology companies, separate fact-checkers and media outlets to ensure that sources of propaganda are restricted and disempowered, while also encouraging the development of high-quality, trusted and reputable sources of scientific knowledge.

The fact that Meta chose to refrain from fact-checking and content moderation and its subsequent effects serves as a reminder of the threats we face as a nation from fake news and deception, and how an educated, informed, and active community may be the best way to combat both current and future risks.

Nicholas Fang was formerly a journalist and Nominated Member of Parliament. Additionally, he is the owner and managing director of Singapore’s most popular independent fact-checking platform, Black Dot Research, a market and social research firm.