How Meta’s Policy Overhaul Impacts Marketing Strategy

When a platform you can't afford to leave becomes one you can't trust to protect your brand, what do you do? 

As Meta rolls back content moderation and fact-checking in favour of "free expression", marketers face difficult choices. While Meta's reach might make it too big to abandon, the new reality demands a strategic rethink - starting with brand safety, content strategy, and risk management.

Meta’s New Direction

Mark Zuckerberg’s January 7th announcement on Meta’s policy changes spanned multiple aspects of its operations. While some modifications took effect immediately, others will be rolled out gradually over the coming months.

Fact-Checking 

Meta is ending its third-party fact-checking program in the United States. Instead, it will rely on a user-driven "Community Notes" system, aping the controversial approach used on Elon Musk’s X. 

Zuckerberg framed this move as a step towards transparency and free expression, but critics argue it will increase the proliferation of misinformation and harmful content on the site, and undermine public trust. Members of Meta's oversight board, blindsided by the changes, have expressed concerns about their implications.

Relaxation of Content Policies

Meta has also relaxed its moderation policies, including on topics like immigration, race, gender identity, and sexuality. The company will now only enforce restrictions on "illegal and high-severity violations," allowing content that was previously restricted. 

The new “Hateful Conduct” guidelines were positioned as aligning with "mainstream discourse". Pointing to contradictory guidance from leaked internal documents, Meta’s critics say the changes legitimise hate speech, and that hateful discourse will lead to hateful behaviours and harmful consequences for marginalised groups.

Political Content

Meta plans to reintroduce political and civic content to user feeds. When users left X in the wake of Elon Musk’s leadership and landed on Threads as an alternative, many were disappointed in Meta’s policy to deemphasise such material. In the context of Meta’s other policy shifts, this move could leave them feeling it's a case of be careful what you wish for.

Internal Changes

Policy changes have been accompanied by internal changes that appeared designed to align the company’s culture with Trump’s government. 

• Joel Kaplan has replaced Nick Clegg as Meta’s chief of global affairs, while UFC CEO and Trump supporter Dana White has joined Meta’s board of directors.

• The company has eliminated the chief diversity officer role and disbanded its DEI team and programs. This includes ceasing efforts to ensure diverse hiring and procurement practices. Stopping measures designed to address documented and entrenched inequities will, Meta says, allow it to "focus on applying fair and consistent practices that reduce bias for everyone."

• Roy Austin, Meta's Vice President of Civil Rights and Deputy General Counsel hired in 2021, announced his resignation from the company on the same day as the DEI measures were announced.

• Trust and safety teams have been relocated from California to Texas. Meta claims this will reduce perceived bias in content moderation while critics argue it is a blatant political manoeuvre.

• The New York Times reported that facilities managers were instructed to remove sanitary products from men's bathrooms, which had been provided to support transgender and nonbinary employees.

• Speaking on Joe Rogan’s podcast, Zuckerberg criticised what he saw as the "emasculation" of corporate America, arguing that business culture needs "more masculine energy" and that aggression in business has merits.

• Separate from its policy and operational changes, Meta also announced plans to cut approximately 5% of its workforce as part of what Zuckerberg described as an "intense year" ahead for the company in 2025. The layoffs will target around 3,600 employees who Zuckerberg labelled as “low performers”. The company plans to backfill these positions later in the year with new hires.

The Great Realignment?

While Zuckerberg frames Meta’s policy decisions as a response to a broader cultural shifts and a return to the company’s “roots around free expression”, they have been criticised as a capitulation to political pressure. 

The timing suggests a carefully choreographed rapprochement with the new administration. It's certainly a striking reversal for a CEO who banned Trump from Facebook and Instagram just four years ago after the January 6th assault on the Capitol, when Zuckerberg declared him too dangerous for the platforms.

The donations and guest list for Trump’s inauguration shows that Meta isn't alone. Across Silicon Valley, companies who once positioned themselves as progressive champions are lining up to show they’re able to adapt to the new political reality. Values, it seems, are out. Cold business logic is in.

Another explanation, hinted at in Zuckerberg’s video, is that he is currying favour to gain Trump’s backing in a potential showdown with regulators in the EU, UK, and Brazil. It's a high-stakes gambit that could reshape global social networks – or backfire spectacularly if regulators call Meta's bluff.

Meta’s Future: Too Big to Fail?

The durability of Meta's new direction rests on two key assumptions:

1. Meta is so deeply enmeshed in people’s lives that effective boycotts or a mass exodus are unlikely to happen. While there has been an uptick in Google searches for deleting Meta accounts and some calls for a boycott, the numbers will be a miniscule in relation to its overall users.

2. Until and unless audiences take their attention elsewhere, most advertisers are unlikely to abandon the platform. The company is second only to Google in the digital ads market and, while it can continue to deliver on reach and ROI, it can act with relative impunity. Some advertisers have expressed unease but, barring further controversy, we’re unlikely to see ad revenues plunge like they did on X under Musk’s leadership.

These calculations appear sound, at least in the short term. X's experience under Musk shows that both users and advertisers will tolerate significant platform disruption before heading for the exit. It was only when X's owner actively antagonised advertisers and embraced extremist content that the platform saw major account deletions and devastating revenue drops.

So far Zuckerberg’s ego doesn’t appear to be a contributing factor. However, the outlook remains risky. The changes are set against a backdrop of general disaffection with social media, audience fragmentation, and generational shifts that make Meta less relevant for younger users. If the environment becomes increasingly toxic, reaching the tipping point that drove the exodus from X, both users and brands will reconsider their positions.

Implications for Marketers

Smart marketers cannot ignore the changes. Their calculus might be that Meta is too big to abandon for the time being, but that it's also too volatile to take business as usual for granted. 

Even if you’re not considering the need to divest your brand of Meta, you still need to evolve your strategies to match the new reality and be ready to shift gears if needed. If nothing else, it’s a reminder of the need for agility and caution in becoming too reliant on any one platform.

Risk Management

Meta's commitment to "catch less bad stuff" requires brands to strengthen their own safety protocols. The relaxation of content moderation will create a more permissive environment and an opening for harmful or offensive content. 

Brands will need to exercise heightened vigilance to ensure their content and ads do not appear alongside problematic material. A robust brand safety strategy, including keyword exclusions and careful monitoring, will be essential. Fine-tuned ad targeting parameters, narrow audience segments, and contextual targeting can help minimise exposure to brand safety risks.

Companies should also strengthen their crisis management capabilities. The potential for viral controversies increases in a less moderated environment, demanding faster response times and clearer escalation procedures.

Ad Performance and Costs

Meta’s policy shifts risk alienating some user segments and could alter user behaviour and engagement patterns. Marketers should monitor performance metrics closely to understand the impact on ad effectiveness and adapt campaigns accordingly.

Content Strategy

Content strategy needs to evolve to account for a less moderated environment. Brands should:

• Focus on creating high-quality, factual content that can stand on its own merit.

• Consider implementing internal fact-checking processes for shared content.

• Strengthen community management capabilities to address potential increases in controversial comments or interactions.

• Develop clear guidelines for responding to misinformation and navigating potentially polarised discussions.

Platform Diversification

Over-reliance on a single platform is inherently risky. Given the potential for reputational risks, reducing dependency and diversifying across established advertising platforms such as Google and LinkedIn is prudent. New platforms such as Bluesky don’t currently offer advertising but can provide alternative avenues for reaching target audiences.

Ethical Considerations

While it is too early to tell, the loosening of moderation policies may attract backlash from users and advocacy groups concerned about misinformation and hate speech. Brands should consider their stance on these issues and prepare for possible public relations challenges. They should also have a frank discussion about the circumstances under which they would pull investment and/or presence from the platform.

Now and Next

To help navigate these changes, marketing teams need both rapid response capabilities and longer-term strategic planning. Meta's evolution won't happen overnight, giving brands time to adapt - but only if they start preparing now.

Immediate Actions:

• Audit current brand safety measures

• Review and update crisis management protocols

• Assess audience sentiment and engagement patterns

• Develop enhanced social listening and content moderation strategies

Forward Planning:

• Evaluate platform diversification opportunities

• Explore community-building capabilities on more controlled platforms

• Investigate emerging platform opportunities

• Strengthen owned media channels

• Discuss your exit strategy

The Bottom Line

The social media landscape is changing in ways that would have been hard to imagine just a few years ago. Meta's transformation highlights a broader truth about social media: if you don’t own it, you don’t control it. 

For marketers, this suggests the need for a new kind of pragmatism. Rather than viewing platforms as permanent infrastructure, smart businesses need to treat them as powerful but potentially impermanent channels. MySpace and Twitter are cautionary tales for the social media age. No-one is too big to fail and sometimes even well-loved brands become too toxic to tolerate.

In the short term, you need to assess your social presence with clear eyes. Review crisis management plans, strengthen internal guidelines for content and engagement, and potentially diversify platform presence to mitigate risks.

Looking further ahead, the focus should be on building stronger direct relationships with audiences for resilience against increasing volatility across all social media platforms. This might mean developing stronger owned media channels, improving community building capabilities, or rethinking advertising strategy entirely.

Finally, success in this new environment requires understanding that reach and engagement aren't everything. Brand safety, value alignment, and genuine connection with your audience matter more than ever.

At 1827 Marketing, we help B2B brands navigate a changing digital marketing landscape with confidence. Our team of specialists can help you develop a resilient marketing strategy that balances opportunity and risk. To discuss how these changes might affect your business and explore solutions, get in touch.