In a Reuters report, published on Saturday, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg introduced the new Threads app as a "friendly" place for public communication, rivaling the Elon Musk-owned Twitter.

Under Musk, Twitter's content moderation has been drastically scaled back, with malfunctions and hasty choices driving away big-name personalities and advertisers.

After Threads was launched on Wednesday, Zuckerburg explained that "We are definitely focusing on kindness and making this a friendly place," explaining that it would hold users to the same standards as Instagram.

In addition, the CEO has been proactively adopting an algorithmic method of putting up information, which provides it greater control over the sort of fare that performs well as it attempts to shift away from news and towards entertainment.

However, Paul argues that by connecting Threads to sites such as Mastodon, and given the popularity of microblogging among news junkies, politicians, and other aficionados of rhetorical battle, Meta is also inviting new issues with Threads and attempting to carve a new way through them.

No fact-checking for Threads

One of these issues is the fact that it will not bring its fact-checking program to Threads.

To begin with, the firm will not expand its current fact-checking program to Threads, according to spokesperson Christine Pai. She announced that any posts on Facebook or Instagram will carry their fact-checked false rating with them to Threads.

Related News

Meta knew of child exploitation subscriptions, allowed them anyway

Facebook: State censorship tool and US intelligence servant

Pai was asked by Reuters, a partner in fact-checking on Meta, why this is so, and Reuters received no answer.

On Thursday, Adam Mosseri, head of Instagram explained in a New York Times podcast that Threads was more "supportive of public discourse" than other platforms by Meta, noting the necessity to draw in a more news-focused crowd but focusing on lighter topics like music and fashion.

Hours after its launch, Reuters found that accounts on Threads were posting about "billionaire Satanists" and arguments around gender identity, as well as Israeli violence in the West Bank.

Paul believes more difficulties in filtering material will arise after Meta connects Threads to the so-called fediverse, where users from servers run by non-Meta organizations could speak with Threads users.

According to the Palestinian social media monitoring center, Sada Social, 600 Palestinian accounts or pro-Palestinian #Facebook posts were restricted or deleted in 2021, which is a record. #Palestine #فيسبوك_يحجب_القدس pic.twitter.com/4cA6I3wGnE

— Al Mayadeen English (@MayadeenEnglish) December 31, 2021

According to Pai, if an account violates the Instagram regulations it will be "blocked from accessing Threads, meaning that server's content would no longer appear on Threads and vice versa."

The former head of security at Meta Alex Stamos made a post on Threads that the firm would experience more difficulty conducting critical sorts of content moderation enforcement without access to back-end data about users who publish prohibited content.

"With federation, the metadata that big platforms use to tie accounts to a single actor or detect abusive behavior at scale aren't available," he explained, adding that this would make "stopping spammers, troll farms, and economically driven abusers much harder."

He expected Threads to limit the fediverse servers with a high number of abusive posts and to impose greater penalties for those who posted unlawful content like child pornography.

Solomon Messing of the Center for Social Media and Politics at New York University believes that when illegal matters are considered, many complications arise such as child exploitation, nonconsensual sexual imagery, and weapons sales.

Messing questions whether those who run into such material have a much bigger responsibility than just blocking it from Threads.