Meta's Policy Shift: Balancing Free Expression, Trump Influence, and Internal Backlash

Mark Zuckerberg's recent declaration that Meta would adjust its moderation strategies to endorse greater "free expression" was widely interpreted as an effort to mollify President-elect Donald Trump. Notably, Meta has actively sought to reconcile with Trump since his election victory in November, seeking his support as it positions itself as a major player in the ai sector.

Why Meta had to 'bend the knee to Trump'

More than its Silicon Valley counterparts, Meta has made public overtures to Trump following his election victory, attempting to improve relations after a tumultuous four years marked by Trump's strong criticism of the platform.

Leading up to the recent announcement, Zuckerberg has taken measures to court Trump's favor, including engaging with Trump during his first presidential term and forming ties with individuals close to him, such as UFC CEO Dana White.

The policy shift, which involves ending third-party fact-checking, lifting restrictions on sensitive topics, and reintroducing political content to users' feeds, has drawn both internal and external pushback, with concerns raised about implications for marginalized groupe s' safety.

Despite this backlash, Meta's willingness to pursue these changes appears influenced by previous workforce cuts and changes in its leadership, potentially reducing resistance to broad policy alterations.

As part of its efforts to align with Trump's administration, Meta has also expressed its intention to reward countries that have not implemented stricter AI technology regulations, potentially reflecting a desire to influence international policy to further its own interests.

Furthermore, Meta's embrace of a less diversity-oriented approach in its hiring processes and its new content moderation policies have drawn parallels to the Trump administration's views and policies, signaling a deliberate realignment with the current political landscape.