As a 48-year-old Dutchman who has made his home in sunny Portugal, I view Mark Zuckerberg’s recent turnaround with mixed feelings. From my house in the Algarve, I closely follow global news, and the developments surrounding Meta’s policies are nothing short of fascinating. What Zuckerberg is doing now feels like a late, and perhaps even cowardly, attempt to make amends for years of mistakes. But hey, better late than never.
On January 7, Zuckerberg appeared with a remarkable message on Facebook and Instagram. He announced changes to the content moderation on his platforms, supposedly in response to a “cultural tipping point.” That tipping point? Donald Trump’s election. He acknowledged mistakes and excessive censorship in the past and emphasized that Trump’s return offers an opportunity to restore freedom of speech. A bold move? Perhaps. But appointing Trump allies like Dana White to the board of directors makes me feel more like Zuckerberg has been pressured into this decision.
Zuckerberg seems to have no choice but to bow to Trump’s whims. Consider Trump’s previous statements calling Facebook “an enemy of the people” and even threatening legal action against Zuckerberg personally. It seems like American corporate leaders, from Tim Cook to Sam Altman, are adapting to a new political reality. Even Amazon is joining in by announcing a multimillion-dollar production about the new First Lady. It’s almost surreal.
But back to Zuckerberg. His decision to relax moderation policies is, in itself, the right one. Over the past few years, freedom of speech on Meta’s platforms has been increasingly restricted. What started as an attempt to tackle disinformation and hate speech grew into an overly controlled system. Even accurate information was sometimes wrongfully removed, such as the New York Post story about Hunter Biden. Discussions on controversial topics, like transgender rights, have become nearly impossible. That can’t be the intention, right?
I also understand that content moderation is a tricky game. Zuckerberg himself admits that loosening the rules will likely lead to more unpleasantness. Here in Portugal, where society is a bit more laissez-faire, you see that freedom of speech also has its limits. Platforms like Telegram, which hardly moderate at all, have become hotbeds for criminal activity. On X (formerly Twitter), the situation under Elon Musk has also worsened. The absence of proper oversight has led to an increase in violent and illegal content. That’s certainly not what you want.
Yet, Meta’s course correction is a step in the right direction. Social media should not concern itself with what is morally right or wrong. Instead, they should focus on removing illegal content and being transparent about their policies. In my opinion, that’s the only way to take users seriously. After all, who believes everything they see on their timeline? Here in Portugal, people laugh at the notion; they know a healthy dose of skepticism is needed to navigate the digital world.
I think Zuckerberg might actually be setting a good example. It’s time for platforms to stop moralizing and focus on what truly matters: freedom of speech, within the boundaries of the law. Whether this step is sufficient remains to be seen, but it is at least a start.
This opinion piece was submitted to the Dutch newspaper Trouw and the French newspaper Libération.