Meta Platforms Inc. has announced that, starting in the U.S., it will end its third-party fact-checking program, which identifies misinformation on its social networking services including Facebook and Instagram. We must wonder if this will only encourage the spread of false information. As a company responsible for managing vital information infrastructure, Meta must recognize its responsibilities.

The fact-checking program was launched after widespread misinformation emerged as an issue during the 2016 U.S. presidential election, which sent Donald Trump to the White House the first time. Based on reviews by fact-checking and news organizations, misinformation was given ratings such as "false" or "partly false."

Trump criticized social media platforms for what he described as "unfair censorship." Following his reelection, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg adopted a more compliant stance. Zuckerberg visited Trump at his Mar-a-Lago resort, and Meta contributed $1 million to Trump's inauguration fund.

Zuckerberg argued that the fact-checkers were "too politically biased" and stated it was "time to get back to our roots around free expression."

Freedom of expression is, of course, a fundamental value. However, allowing false information to circulate unchecked could mislead people and deepen societal divisions.

For now, the elimination of fact-checking applies only in the U.S., but the International Fact-Checking Network issued an open letter to Zuckerberg, warning, "If Meta decides to stop the program worldwide, it is almost certain to result in real-world harm in many places."

Meta plans to replace third-party fact-checking with a feature that allows users to verify each other's posts. However, the absence of expert involvement raises doubts about whether this system can objectively determine the truth.

X, formerly known as Twitter, has a similar feature called "Community Notes," but it has failed to effectively curb misinformation and discriminatory content. In Europe, universities and government institutions have increasingly stopped using X.

Meta has also announced plans to review its regulations on harmful content and relax the criteria for actions such as deletion. This has sparked concerns that offensive posts targeting sexual minorities, immigrants and other groups could spread more easily.

The effort to ensure soundness in cyberspace has always involved balancing freedom of expression with regulation through ongoing trial and error. Meta's policy shift risks undoing these efforts. The company should reconsider its decision.