The Danger of Echo Chambers: Implications of Meta’s Reduced Content Moderation - Part 2

Meta's recent shift towards reduced content moderation has sparked a debate within the advertising and marketing industry. Industry leaders express concerns about the potential rise of hate speech, misinformation, and the erosion of trust in social media platforms. While some argue that reduced moderation champions free speech and unlocks creative opportunities, others fear it could alienate brands and negatively impact society, particularly in a diverse nation like India. The second part of this feature explores the diverse perspectives of industry experts on the implications of this shift and the ethical considerations for brands navigating this evolving landscape.

Societal implications 

Given the role of social media in shaping public opinion and political discourse in India, the societal implications of reduced content moderation, especially around topics like caste, religion, and gender, can be far-reaching and insidious.

Dinakar Menon, Managing Partner, BigTrunk, is of the opinion that the reduction of content moderation by Meta introduces a double-edged sword. On one hand, he adds, it champions free expression, potentially unlocking untapped creative opportunities. On the other, it risks alienating brands wary of being associated with harmful or divisive content.

“Especially in India, where digital platforms shape public opinion on polarizing issues, the stakes are higher. Brands must weigh their ethical obligations against business priorities, striking a delicate balance. Perhaps this is less about choosing sides and more about shaping the digital landscape responsibly for advertisers, platforms, and society alike,” Menon adds.

Siva Balakrishnan, CEO & Founder of Vserve, highlights the serious consequences of reduced content moderation in India, where social media heavily influences discussions on sensitive topics like politics, religion, and caste. He emphasizes that these topics are highly sensitive and often lead to heated online debates. Without proper content moderation, misinformation and hate speech can easily spread, escalating tensions, disrupting social harmony, and potentially even inciting violence.

Balakrishnan also warns about the potential for echo chambers to form, where extremist voices are amplified while marginalized groups are silenced. He states that this risks eroding the democratic spirit of social media, turning it into a hostile and untrustworthy space.

“Unchecked content during elections can manipulate public opinion, undermining the integrity of the electoral process. Political parties may exploit this lack of moderation to spread propaganda and fuel division. In a diverse nation like India, moderation is not just about controlling speech; it's about ensuring that online spaces remain safe, inclusive, and representative for all. Platforms like Meta must acknowledge the gravity of their role in this ecosystem and strive to find a balance between free expression and accountability,” Balakrishnan adds.

Yash Chandiramani, Founder and Chief Strategist, Admatazz, also believes that also believes that it could have a tremendous impact as social media can get extremely vile, especially with the bullying and fake news. Community notes has proved to be helpful on X, but it still puts the burden on the user and that can be a hit of a miss.

Algorithms as the villain

Experts like Ashish Bhasin warn of the dangers of algorithmic bias on social media. In a diverse nation like India, algorithms designed to maximize engagement can amplify harmful content, fueling social unrest.

Bhasin brings in an example from Yuval Noah Harari’s book ‘Nexus’. In it, Harari discusses the impact of AI algorithms on social media, citing instances like the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar and the Bolsonaro presidency in Brazil. These examples highlight how algorithms can exacerbate societal issues by amplifying negative or inflammatory content.

Bhasin points out that in India this is particularly relevant given our diverse and multifaceted society, with millions of social media users. The country’s diversity – spanning states, castes, religions, and ideologies – makes it imperative to be cautious about the role of social media algorithms. The concern is not only about fake news, but also about how algorithms present and prioritize content. Algorithms, often designed to maximize engagement, tend to promote sensational or controversial content because such content attracts more views and interaction.

“This creates a vicious cycle, where inflammatory or polarizing material is amplified, while constructive or balanced voices are sidelined. In a country like India, where even a small spark can trigger widespread unrest, the societal risks of such algorithmic behaviour are significant. Therefore, India must adopt a more vigilant approach – not just from an advertising perspective but also from a broader societal standpoint. Ensuring that social media platforms and their algorithms do not inadvertently fan the flames of hate speech or divisive rhetoric is essential for maintaining harmony,” states Bhasin.

The fact remains that no content moderation will ever be perfect, and the debate between both ends of enforcement will stay divisive, points out Chetan Asher, Founder and CEO, Tonic Worldwide.

“Whether the purported shift toward ‘free speech’ and ‘individual agency’ provides a net benefit remains to be seen, but imperfectly enforced policies, at either extreme, can certainly have significant consequences. It’s also evident that users and brands will take a more active role in shaping their online experiences than they have in the past,” Ashar says.

Rishi Sen reckons that the internet has brought the world closer, amplifying voices and opinions through online content. “While free speech is a fundamental right, reduced moderation could lead to more challenges than solutions. To address this, it’s crucial for authorities to emphasize fact-checking and improve the ability to distinguish between real and false information.”

According to Sunitha Natarajan, Director - Digital Strategy, Social Panga, while Meta is a powerful platform, we should not solely hold them responsible for the implications of their actions. She argues that we haven’t yet figured out how to empower social media platforms to effectively moderate harmful content while simultaneously preventing them from controlling speech and potentially censoring legitimate viewpoints. Furthermore, we haven’t found a way to create media systems that are resistant to manipulation by both powerful corporations and governments.

Ethical responsibility

In a market like India, where misinformation and hate speech have led to significant offline consequences, doing away with moderation policies by a platform as mammoth as Meta can have concomitant consequences. Do Indian brands have an ethical responsibility to reconsider their ad spend on platforms like Meta reducing moderation, even if it means sacrificing reach and precision targeting?

Brands will always advertise where their audiences are spending time, says Rishi Sen. He believes that it doesn’t make sense to advertise elsewhere where consumers aren’t looking. As of now, Sen points out, Meta and Google remain the biggest platforms where consumers spend most of their time online.

“Having said that, both brands and agencies should be equally responsible to ethically advertise, especially ensuring the safety of marginalized communities to the best of their ability. We are continuously evolving as a society, and with that come newer perspectives, causes and ideologies. As marketers who influence people for a living, we need to lead the way, setting the right example for others,” he states.

Sunitha Natarajan says that while the decision to reconsider ad spend on Meta platforms will vary based on individual brand values, scale, and target audience, it is crucial for brands to carefully weigh the potential risks and rewards. Prioritizing long-term brand reputation and social responsibility conversations alongside business objectives is essential in navigating this evolving landscape.

Yash Chandiramani is of the opinion that the decision of whether to advertise on a particular platform is an individual one for each brand. He suggests waiting to observe the impact of any changes before drawing hasty conclusions. He acknowledges that individuals have the personal choice not to use a particular platform. However, if advertising on a platform is legally permissible, a business should make decisions that prioritize the financial well-being of the company.

According to Siva Balakrishnan, ethically, brands hold significant influence. By reconsidering ad spending, they send a strong message that safety and integrity matter more than reach or precision targeting. Such actions could push platforms to prioritize moderation and accountability.

However, Balakrishnan adds that there’s a trade-off. Reducing spend on Meta could mean losing access to its massive audience. Brands must evaluate whether this aligns with their values and long-term goals.

“Some may choose to reallocate budgets to safer platforms or invest in campaigns that promote awareness against misinformation. In a socially complex market like India, brands have the power to lead by example. Upholding ethical standards in advertising isn’t just about profit – it’s about contributing to a healthier, more responsible digital ecosystem,” he concludes.

In conclusion, Meta’s reduced content moderation policy presents a complex challenge for brands navigating the evolving digital landscape. While free speech is paramount, the potential societal implications, including the rise of hate speech, misinformation, and the amplification of harmful content, cannot be ignored. The ethical responsibility of brands extends beyond simply maximizing reach and revenue. By carefully evaluating their advertising strategies, prioritizing ethical considerations, and potentially reallocating budgets to safer platforms, brands can play a crucial role in shaping a more responsible and inclusive digital ecosystem in India.

Also Read: The danger is when their love turns into a lethal obsession, says Taniya Kalrra