Meta’s Content Moderation Shift Sparks Concerns for Sexual and Reproductive Health Information Access
In a significant move last week, social media behemoth Meta, parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, announced the termination of its fact-checking program and a shift towards a user-sourced "community notes" model for content moderation. This decision, mirroring the approach adopted by X (formerly Twitter), raises concerns about the proliferation of misinformation and hate speech, particularly impacting vulnerable communities such as Indigenous people, migrants, refugees, women, and LGBTQIA+ individuals. While much attention has focused on the implications for political discourse and health misinformation in general, the potential impact on sexual and reproductive health information online warrants closer examination.
Social media platforms have become vital tools for disseminating sexual and reproductive health information, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic. Organizations like Family Planning Australia utilize these platforms to share crucial information about sensitive topics like unplanned pregnancy and HIV, reaching diverse audiences, including those in rural areas, young people, and individuals without established connections to healthcare services. These platforms serve as virtual town squares for health information exchange, but Meta’s policy changes threaten to disrupt this vital function.
Meta’s claim that community notes will be sourced from diverse perspectives to mitigate bias is met with skepticism, especially considering leaked internal training materials suggesting that hateful comments targeting marginalized groups will now be permissible. This creates a hostile environment for both users and healthcare providers sharing information online. While Meta’s Oversight Board has acknowledged past over-censorship of content related to sexuality and gender, the shift to community notes raises concerns about a pendulum swing towards insufficient moderation, potentially exposing vulnerable users to harmful content.
The community notes system, replacing human moderators with crowdsourced input, relies on multiple users flagging misinformation. However, investigations on X reveal that this process is often reactive, with false information going viral before notes are added. Moreover, this system can be manipulated for malicious purposes. Research on "user-generated warfare" demonstrates how politically motivated users exploit community guidelines to target content creators, including women’s health and LGBTQIA+ organizations, as part of an "anti-rights pushback." These targeted attacks disproportionately affect marginalized communities, leading to self-censorship and withdrawal from social media platforms.
The shift to community notes has already prompted many LGBTQIA+ and women’s health organizations to abandon X, and users are also leaving Meta platforms. While some health outreach organizations are exploring alternative communication channels like newsletters, not everyone is comfortable sharing personal information. Social media platforms offer anonymity and privacy for vulnerable individuals seeking reliable sexual and reproductive health information, and the loss of these spaces creates a significant gap in access.
The current situation presents a complex challenge for sexual and reproductive health information dissemination. Health service providers must adapt to the evolving landscape and explore new platforms like Bluesky, even if it requires venturing into uncharted territory. While investing in new platforms may strain resources, maintaining the status quo is not a viable option in the face of these dynamic changes. The priority must remain on ensuring access to accurate and reliable sexual and reproductive health information for all, regardless of the platform. The future of online health information access relies on striking a balance between free speech and protecting vulnerable communities from harmful content and misinformation.
