The devastating comms impact of a Trumpian social-media age

Imagine a world where anyone can shout whatever they want, regardless of whether it's true. Welcome to Trump 2.0. That's the social media age we live in. In a sweeping move, president Donald Trump has ordered to “immediately stop all government censorship” of social media.

This action might dismantle decades of work between the Silicon Valley and government efforts to combat fake news; it might effectively be a victory to those who weaponise disinformation. The order is also a victory for big tech, platforms like Meta, which are adopting a more right-wing, hands-off approach to fact-checking and content moderation. 

While Zuckerberg insisted the decision was made in the name of “free speech,” but it’s been largely viewed as an attempt to appease the new US president. Indeed, Trump praised the move, and Zuckerberg, along with Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos, had ringside seats at Trump's inauguration on January 20th. 

From left: Mark Zuckerberg, Lauren Sanchez, Jeff Bezos, Sundar Pichai and Elon Musk at the inauguration of Donald Trump on January 20. Photo: Getty Images

A podium for misinformation

Meta’s decision has caused a flurry of reactions in the comms industry, mostly of the concerned kind. But others are questioning the effectiveness of Meta’s fact-checking programme in the first place. Alan Soon, co-founder of Splice Media, implies that it’s naïve to elevate Meta’s platforms as beacons of truth.

“My view is that Meta's fact-checking initiatives were never done in good faith to begin with,” he says.

“[The programme] was largely a nod to the news industry, acknowledging that some [publishers’] advertising businesses have collapsed as a result of the rise of social media. It’s important to understand that Meta’s fact-checking was ineffective at so many levels. Meta's advertising platforms, for example, are primed to ensure that emotionally charged posts get the most attention. Whether these were factual or not didn't matter.”

He adds that Meta’s fact-checking efforts were also unscalable. Because news cycles on social media are notoriously short and fast, it would be impossible for journalists to debunk lies as quickly as they appear. Furthermore, with AI content being optimised for engagement, the fight is essentially lost on social media.

Soon’s bigger worry is also what Trump and Zuckerberg define as ‘free speech’.

“Meta now allows you to call gay people mentally ill, or to say that women can't get certain jobs because of their gender,” he says. “The redefinition of free speech by Meta should be something that we're all concerned about. Zuckerberg has also made it clear that he's going to work with the Trump administration to push back on governments around the world that are determined to curb hate speech. This has massive implications for national laws.”

On the other hand, agency heads are worried about how Meta’s decision might ramp up misinformation and threat clients’ brand safety.

Lars Voedisch, group CEO of Precious Communications, calls the decision by Meta “disappointing” and says that it increases the risk of misinformation spreading unchecked, which will impact both users and brands, not to mention erode public trust in social-media platforms.

“Brands may face reputational damage from association with false information, difficulty maintaining authenticity, and potential consumer boycotts,” he says. “The lack of fact-checking could also exacerbate existing echo chambers and filter bubbles, where users are primarily exposed to information that confirms their existing beliefs.”

To mitigate the risks of misinformation, brands must monitor platforms closely and maintain transparency in their communications, he adds. This can be done by way of social listening, focusing on authentic content, developing crisis communication plans, adopting third-party verification, and partnering with reputable agencies for guidance.

For agency practitioners who specialise in science-based industries such as healthcare, the damage could be significant. Robert Magyar, EVP, head of healthcare at Weber Shandwick APAC, says that Meta’s decision will make it difficult to monitor and manage communications around therapeutic areas and diseases made by professionals on Facebook. If the Covid years offer a lesson, it’s that medical quackery and pseudo-science can cause long-lasting consequences.

“Misinformation can lead to delayed diagnoses of patients, patients taking ineffective or dangerous products, and cause physical and emotional damage to patients and caregivers, just to name a few [consequences],” says Magyar. “Plus, brands that cannot effectively manage misleading comments and misinformation posted in response to their content will also face reputational challenges.”

He adds that it will be difficult for users to identify genuine medical experts from charlatans masquerading as experts who may be trying to sell ineffective products and devices or spread information on dangerous or unregulated treatments.

The lasting power of earned media

It’s no secret that social-media platforms and verified publications have long been at loggerheads. For instance, Australian news publishers argue that “Facebook and Google unfairly benefit in terms of advertising revenue” when links to news articles appear on their platforms. With fact-checking coming to an end on Facebook, could this potentially renew the relevance of earned media?

In theory, it should be easy to redirect users and brands towards verified publications for fact-checked information. But the reality is grim. Based on Reuters’ and YouGov’s 2024 study on digital news consumption, only 17% of respondents said they paid for or accessed paid online news last year.

From the perspective of news organisations, layoffs, the shuttering of titles, rising costs, and falling ad revenues are just some issues that continue to plague the industry. Unsurprisingly, verified publications losing traffic to social-media platforms is also high among the list of issues found. The study found that the majority of respondents identify social media, search, and aggregators as their main gateway to online news, with only a fifth using news websites or apps as their main source of online news (see Reuters data below).

However, it’s unclear if the lack of fact-checking on Facebook—combined with rife misinformation on X—might have a positive spillover effect on news publications. But in a post-truth era where an incoming US president habitually degrades verified publications as ‘elitist’, it might be premature to suggest that earned media remains highly relevant.

Anthony Larmon, Southeast Asia MD for Era Communications, says that verified publications are under attack in their own way with outcries such as “fake news” and “mainstream media doesn’t want you to know that”. Because earned media can offer a “layer of legitimacy” that social media cannot, Larmon stresses that the comms industry should protect trust in the institution.

Abuse of power by bad actors

A potential downfall of social-media platforms being driven entirely by community notes is the ability for institutions of power and political regimes to capitalise the feature that for their own interests.

For instance, Trump ally Musk laid off employees responsible for monitoring misinformation, as well as restored over 62,000 suspended user accounts spouting white nationalist and neo-Nazi sentiments that were previously reported for spreading hate speech and conspiracy theories. During the election period, many referred to X as an unofficial mouthpiece for the Trump campaign (see Musk's post below containing false information).

The Dems have imported massive numbers of illegals to swing states. Triple digit increases over the past 4 years!

Their STATED plan is to give them citizenship as soon as possible, turning all swing states Dem.

America would then become a one-party, deep blue socialist state. https://t.co/zxVmmR0GqO

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 25, 2024

In Asia, however, even if topics of contention on social-media platforms might look a little different, the rise of authoritarianism and far-right sentiment in the region is not to be taken lightly. 

Larmon says that each Asian state may have specific definitions of what free speech looks like based on culture and state-led mechanisms, and dangerous sentiment such as the far-right or climate-change denial could play out differently.

Take Singapore for example, which introduced the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) as a way to combat misinformation—including social-media posts. Regardless of mixed reactions about how POFMA has been implemented so far, false information on Meta platforms regarding issues of national interest are regulated within the act. On the whole, it can be assumed that Singapore netizens would already be aware of the repercussions of spreading high-stakes falsehood despite Meta’s end to its fact-checking programme.

Having said that, whether brands and reputable institutions should leave Meta platforms remains to be seen. On X, for instance, major brands such as Disney and Apple have either paused advertising or significantly reduced adspend for fear of brand safety.

On whether a similar brand exodus can be expected on Meta platforms, Larmon says the exit pattern on X is shared between users and brands.

“With X, there was a general understanding that it was no longer working for all parties. But would brands exit X if people weren’t exiting X? [Facebook’s fate] will come down to user experience and how well community notes work,” he says.

Voedisch agrees that a brand exodus is unlikely for now, especially given Meta’s scale and influence in the region. For context, India, Indonesia, Philippines, and Vietnam have some of the highest numbers of active Facebook users in the world.

He adds that brands will face a dilemma should the situation on Meta platforms deteriorate: Rely on social media's vast reach or seek safer but less visible alternatives.

“Moving away offers control, direct audience connection, and valuable data. However, it sacrifices reach, incurs costs, and lacks immediate feedback,” he says. “The optimal solution likely lies in a balanced approach, leveraging owned channels while strategically utilising social media where appropriate.”