Please note that the FactCheckHub has not obtained any right from the authors or copyright owners of all third-party contents from embedded links and shall incur no liability in this regard.
Please note that the FactCheckHub has not obtained any right from the authors or copyright owners of all third-party contents from embedded links and shall incur no liability in this regard.
Please note that the FactCheckHub has not obtained any right from the authors or copyright owners of all third-party contents from embedded links and shall incur no liability in this regard.
Please note that the FactCheckHub has not obtained any right from the authors or copyright owners of all third-party contents from embedded links and shall incur no liability in this regard.
In a nationwide broadcast, the president suspended the state governor, Siminalayi Fubara, his Deputy, Ngozi Odu, and members of the State House of Assembly. However, he retained the state judiciary.
Tinubu blamed the governor for allowing the political crisis in the state to escalate.
He particularly criticised Fubara for failing to take action after an oil facility was blown up in the state on Tuesday night.
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
Nearly 24 hours after the explosion, the president stated that the governor had yet to condemn the incident or reach out to him.
The president appointed Ibok-ete Ekwe Ibas, a rear admiral, as the state administrator.
History of emergency declarations in Nigeria
In Nigeria, a state of emergency is usually declaredin times of crisis, significant civil unrest, heightened insecurity, or political turmoil.
In recent years, it has been implemented in reaction to riots, terrorist attacks, orduring political crises.
Former presidents Olusegun Obasanjo, and Goodluck Jonathan, have previously declared states of emergency at different times.
Former Nigerian president, Olusegun Obasanjo.
Obasanjo in 2004 declared a state of emergency in Plateau State following a religious crisis.
Obasanjo sacked the state governor, Joshua Dariye, dissolved the legislature and appointed a retired army general, Chris Ali, as interim administrator for six months.
Obasanjo also declared another emergency in Ekiti State in October 2006.
This followed a leadership crisis, which threw the southwest state into chaos. The crisis started after the impeachment of the then-governor, Ayodele Fayose.
Obasanjo appointed Adetunji Olurin, a retired Brigadier General, as Administrator of the state.
In May 2013, Goodluck Jonathan declaredemergency in three northern states: Adamawa, Borno, and Yobe in a nationwide television broadcast following an upsurge of insecurity in the affected states.
Former Nigerian president, Goodluck Jonathan.
However, Jonathan departed from previous presidents by not removing the state governors in the affected states.
What is a State of Emergency
Although the 1999 Constitution does not categorically state the meaning of a state of emergency, Section 305 provides for the procedure for the declaration of one.
According to Section 305, specifically Section 305 (3) (a) to (g), the President shall have the power to proclaim a state of emergency only when: the federation is at war; the federation is in imminent danger of invasion or involvement in a state of war, or there is actual breakdown of public order and public safety in the federation or any part thereof to such extent as to require extraordinary measures to restore peace and security.
Other conditions are: If there is a clear and present danger of an actual breakdown of public order and public safety in the federation or any part thereof requiring extraordinary measures to avert such danger; (e) there is an occurrence or imminent danger, or the occurrence of any disaster or natural calamity, affecting the community or a section of the community in the federation; (f) there is any other public danger which clearly constitutes a threat to the existence of the federation; and if the president receives a request to do so in accordance with the provisions of subsection (4) of this section.
In line with the requirement of Section 305 of the constitution,which has been used to declare a state of emergency several times in Nigeria, the procedure to be followed states:
1. Subject to the provisions of this Constitution,thepresident may, by instrument published in the official Gazette of the Government of the Federation, issue a proclamation of a state of emergency in the Federation or any part thereof.
2. The president shall immediately after the publication, transmit copies of the official Gazette of the Government of the federation containing the proclamation, including the details of the emergency to the president of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, each of whom shall forthwith convene or arrange for a meeting of the House of which he is President or Speaker, as the case may be, to consider the situation and decide whether or not to pass a resolution approving the proclamation.
According to a published journal by Bright Erazie Oniha, a lawyer, titled “Legality of the Presidential Declaration of a State of Emergency in Some States in Nigeria and Its Implication on State Government Functionaries”, there are primarily two hurdles which the president must cross in order for there to be in place a legally valid declaration of a state of emergency.
The first is the issuance of a proclamation of a state of emergency by an instrument published in the official gazette of the government of the federation.
The second hurdle is the immediate transmission of copies of the official gazette containing the proclamation, including details of the emergency, to the National Assembly for approval, which shall then consider the situation and decide whether or not to pass a resolution approving the same.
According to Oniha, until these two hurdles are effectively crossed, there cannot be a valid declaration of a state of emergency.
EDITOR’S NOTE:
* This report was republished from The ICIR. You can read the original article here.
THIS report examines the antics of disinformation actors on X deliberately using disinformation and information manipulation to inflame the ember of tribal hostilities and sow discord between Igbo and Yoruba in Nigeria.
Some networks of disinformation actors on X (formerly Twitter) are systematically recycling old news, twisting media reports and fabricating claims about crimes like ritual killings, theft and drug trafficking to paint rival ethnic groups as inherently criminal, an investigation by The FactCheckHub has shown.
Broadly, these disinformation actors fall into two categories: some posing as members of the Igbo ethnic group in Nigeria’s Southeast deliberately spreading falsehoods about the Yorubas in the nation’s Southwest, while others, claiming Yoruba identity, do the same against the Igbo. Thus, it has been a circle of hate spread and ethnic slurs.
Nigeria is a multi-ethnic nation with over 300 ethnic groups and more than 500 languages, making it one of the most diverse countries in Africa. Historically, ethnic identity has played a significant role in politics, economic opportunities, and social interactions, sometimes leading to divisions and rivalries.
The three largest ethnic groups, the Hausa-Fulani in the North, Yoruba predominantly in the Southwest, and the Igbo majorly in the Southeast, have distinct cultural identities but have also experienced periods of unity and conflict. Political events such as the Nigerian Civil War (1967–1970) and various inter-ethnic clashes have deepened historical grievances, which are often reignited by misinformation and disinformation both online and offline.
In July 2024, an X account with the username: @Lagospedia, which claims to promote the “virtues of Lagos” (a predominantly Yoruba state), ignited controversy for publishing inflammatory posts against the Igbos. Following public outrage, the account was deactivated. Currently, the username has been taken over by another X user. However, several other accounts continue to push similar divisive narratives, using disinformation as their primary tool, The FactCheckHub has found.
Accounts targeting the Igbo ethnic group often circulate outdated or misleading visuals, pairing them with incendiary captions that falsely implicate Igbos in criminal activities. Meanwhile, some X accounts focused on discrediting the Yoruba community deploy the same tactics to reinforce negative stereotypes.
Harry a.k.a. Harrison A who operates both X handles: @chiditweets042 and @harreceipts.
One of the most prominent figures in this influence operation is Harry a.k.a. Harrison A who currently post on the X handle: @harreceipts. Before his previous account, @Chiditweets042, was suspended, he frequently shared misleading crime-related news in Nigeria.
His posts often featured exaggerated headlines and distorted news, specifically portraying Yorubas from the Southwest in a negative light to engage his audience.
Using condescending terms like “Yorubastards” and “Yorubanivorous”, the account consistently shares inflammatory content that portrays Yorubas as drug traffickers and ritualists, among others. Harry, along with many other ethnic disinformation merchants, repeatedly raises false alarms, exploiting Nigeria’s ethnic diversity to escalate tensions.
For almost every crime-related news story in Nigeria, Harry posts provocative comments, stirring emotions and attempting to paint the Southwest as the epicentre of criminal activities in the country. The FactCheckHub has fact-checked many of these claims in the past before his account was eventually taken down by X.
Chains of Propaganda
In February 2022, operatives of the Ogun State Police Command arrested 43-year-old Kehinde Oladimeji and his wife, Adejumoke Raji (35 years old) for possessing fresh human parts, including breasts and hands.
The couple, who are residents of Abeokuta, were arrested by Police operatives from Kemta Divisional Headquarters after Chief Moshood Ogunwolu, the Baale of Leme community, reported them to the police.
Similarly, in March 2024, the Ondo State Police Command said it arrested an Islamic cleric, Oluwafemi Idris, over alleged possession of harvested human body parts.
In August 2024, Harry collaged two different pictures from these two unconnected events together and presented them as a single new story in an attempt to tag Southwest as the hub of ritual killings in Nigeria.
He framed the caption thus:
“Yorubanivorous Skuller Alfa Oluwafemi Idris has been arrested by the police in Ondo State. A search was conducted in his house at Akoko and human hands, three kidneys, three hearts, spine and tongue were found in his possession. The suspect claimed he is an Islamic cleric and some of the human parts were supplied by his friend, an Alhaji who is also a cleric and one Samuel Kutelu, while he supplied one Babatunde Kayode ( an Oluawo) 3 human heads. The said Oluawo and Babatunde Kayode have been arrested.”
Screenshot of one of Harry’s posts on X.
There are two issues with this information. First, the story is not recent as of the time he posted it on X. Second, Harry presented it as an ethnic problem rather than the broader societal challenge that it is. Despite this, the post gained significant traction, amassing over 600,000 views, more than 4,000 likes, and over 2,400 reposts as of September 9, 2024, when our fact-checkerarchived it.
This scenario illustrates how Harry manipulates original stories to push a specific agenda, framing them as an issue peculiar to the Yoruba ethnic group rather than a broader societal issues that require government’s urgent attention. Through toxic media framing and rhetoric, he portrays the Southwest as a hub for ritual killings and labels its indigenes as “skull miners.”
He has posted hundreds of viral divisive narratives on X and built a large fanbase before his account was taken down. In one instance, he posted an image showing people gathering around a Hilux pick-up van with a claim that it shows a Nigerian man, Amos Olalere, who conspired with his mother to murder his younger sister for money rituals in Lagos.
He posted, “29-year old Yoruba man, Amos Olalere has narrated how he conspired with his mother to m¥rd£r his younger sister & had sexual intercourse with her corps£ for money rituals in Lagos….”
Even though Harry framed Yorubas as the orchestrator, a Google reverse image search shows that the image he used has been online for over one year as at then, and it depicts an incident that occurred in Ghana.
Screenshot of a false claim made by Harry on X.
An earlier version of the photo shows that it depicts a murder incident which occurred at Wa, a town in Ghana. Media reports indicated that the image shows the body of a male adult buried in a shallow grave at Bamahu, a suburb of the town and recovered by the Ghanaian police.
Meanwhile, Harry has continued his information manipulation mission using the X handle: @harreceipts as can be seen here.
The list of X accounts promoting these kinds of divisive narratives is numerous. The FactCheckHub identified some of them listed here.
Harry, also called Harrison, is not alone in the coordinated effort to spread disinformation aimed at discrediting the Yoruba ethnic group and deepening the divide between them and the Igbo.
The FactCheckHub’s investigation uncovered several other accounts engaging in ethno-religious-driven disinformation on the microblogging platform.
Another X account with a similar history is the @VoiceofIgbos. In January 2025, the account claimed that a state of emergency had been declared in Oyo State following the killing of over 50 people. He described the entire southwest region as a crime scene characterized by “skull mining and kidnapping.” The account once also shared the screenshot of a 2023 post by one Kehinde Adekusibe, calling for the massacre of Igbos and tagged it as breaking news.
Some monitored X accounts amplifying anti-Yoruba narratives
Names on X
X handles
Attah Ejike
@attahejike567
Koi Koi Media
@KoikiMedia
Truth Media
@greytruthmedia
THE MYSTERIOUS MAN NJOKU
@FREEDOM_LEO2
Ijaw First Son
@CogitoergosumCk
OSE MMUO
@afonjaSlayer
Nwa
@Nwaadaz
High Chief Immanuel Okafor (Ph.D)
@waxdigitals
Emy
@Emjyke
Voice of Igbos
@Voiceofigbos
But checks by The FactCheckHub show no credible media reports or official statements confirming the alleged kidnappings or the declaration of a state of emergency in the Southwestern State. Adewale Osifeso, the Public Relations Officer of the Nigeria Police Force (NPF), Oyo state Command, also debunked the claim when contacted on phone by our fact-checker.
Another similar X account is @Afonjaslayer. On October 26, 2024, the account shareda video of unhealthy persons in an unkept place and claimed that a slave house had been discovered in Nigeria’s Southwest, where they’re selling thousands of Yorubas, both boys and girls. However, when it was subjected to a Google image reverse search, it was discovered that it was a video of apolice raid on November 5, 2019.
Just as many X accounts propagate falsehoods about the Yorubas, The FactCheckHub found several other X accounts that specialise in twisting narratives to portray the Igbo ethnic group in a negative light too. In one instance, these X accounts launched “Igbo Must Go,” an online campaign characterized by various stereotypes and false news about the Igbo ethnic group.
They began with the old videofrom Ghana one year ago to push such dangerous and divisive agenda.
One of the leading accounts in this disinformation operation is @nononsensezone. The account reposted a video showing young men being set ablaze on the street after being beaten by mobs with a claim that it shows Igbos from Nigeria being killed for using people for money rituals in Mozambique.
“Damn. I just watched this video. It has to be one of the most inhumane videos have ever seen. Igbos is not every country you lot need to visit,” the X post read.
Even though the X account posted the video in May 2023, The FactCheckHub’s investigation shows that the video has been online since April 2023, and the incident in the footage occurred in Haiti and not Mozambique. Also, it has nothing to do with Igbos or money rituals.
It is not the first time. The X account has a history of posting misleading visuals and manipulated information about the Igbos. In August 2024, it posteda video claiming that the Igbos are attacking the Nigerian embassy in Dakar, Senegal. When The FactCheckHub subjected the video to a Google reverse image search, it was discovered that the video has been online since 2013.
Screenshot of the viral @nononsensezone post on X. INSERT: MISLEADING verdict.
According to media reports, the attack was done amid the protest by Nigerians over the disappearance of a Nigerian citizen’s body from a hospital morgue. There is no evidence to support the claim that the attack was carried out solely by Nigerians of Igbo extraction. Using old misleading stories, the X account also blamedIgbos for the manufacturing of fake drugs in Nigeria.
Pastor Okezie James Atani operates the X handle: @Onsogbu.
This X account is not alone; several other X accounts are also involved in this disinformation peddling. They post misleading stories and visuals about Igbos and help one another to amplify them so that the posts can go viral.
One of them is the X handle: @Onsogbu which has over 46,000 followers and operated by one Pastor Okezie James Atani. He is also reportedly a supporter of the All Progressives Congress (APC) party in the country and attacks anyone who criticised President Bola Ahmed Tinubu-led government online. He was once allegedly arrested by the Police for online defamation, TheCable reported in April 2024.
Some monitored X accounts amplifying anti-Igbo narratives
Names on X
X handles
IyaLode EFUNSETAN
@absoluteOMP
Nononsense
@NoNonsensezone
Afonja Nopkins
@_Nop_kins
Pastor Okezie J. Atañi
@Onsogbu
Unruly
@pontrol_777
Ọmọ Akin
@GuyMr0
Aina Dipo
@dipoaina1
Femi Olawole
@FemiOlawole
Aare Kakanfo
@Akakanfo
Pathfinder
@Pathfinder077
Another popular X account disseminating divisive narratives on social media is a verified user, Dipo Aina (@dipoaina1) who has over 40,000 followers. Checks show that Dipo Aina is the Managing Director of Onsien Limited, a private limited liability company registered by the nation’s Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) in 2018.
In September 2024, Aina posted a video showing mass human movement on the streets, claiming that it showed residents in parts of Southeastern Nigeria fleeing from recent attacks led by the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB).
Dipo Aina operates the X handle: @dipoaina1.
When our fact-checker subjected keyframes of the video to a Google reverse image search, the results showed an earlier version of the video posted on Facebook on November 24, 2022. It cited Eha Amufu in Enugu State as the affected community. He has also made several divisive remarks against Igbos, as can be seen here and here.
Another X account involved in this information manipulation is @jominabuna2. The account shared photos of human skulls and claimed there’s a festival to celebrate skull mining in Nigeria’s Southeast. This is an attempt to paint the region as a hub of ritual killings.
“Yorubas don’t have a festival where skulls are out on display like they do in Igbo Land. I ask again; Who are the real SKULL MINERS?” the X post read.
However, checks show that the photo represents the war dancing tradition, the integral identity of the people of Ohafia, a Local Government Area and community located in Abia State and the human skulls used were not real as they were crafted from wood.
Deadly consequences
“In a country like Nigeria where ethnicity is already a sensitive issue, this kind of disinformation is like adding petrol to fire,” said Sunday Awosoro, a researcher with Dubawa.
Awosoro warned that ethnic tensions in Nigeria are always simmering beneath the surface, and narratives that portray certain groups as criminals, greedy, or dangerous have real-world consequences.
“It doesn’t just stay online. People carry these mindsets into real life, in markets, schools, workplaces, and even during political campaigns. It creates unnecessary suspicion. Someone hears you’re Igbo, Yoruba, or Hausa, and before they even know you, they’ve attached a stereotype to you,” he explained.
“That kind of mindset can easily escalate into fights, ethnic profiling, and even mob attacks, especially in places where there’s already some tension. So, yes, disinformation like this can spark real-world violence, no doubt,” he added.
FILE PHOTO: Sunday Awosoro.
Awosoro warned that Nigeria’s existing political divisions along ethnic and religious lines are being worsened by disinformation. He noted that when false narratives take root, voters may no longer focus on competence or ideas but instead make decisions based on fear and prejudice.
According to him, politicians often take advantage of these tensions, as it is easier to mobilize support by portraying an ethnic group as being under threat. This, he explained, results in leaders who prioritize ethnic interests over national unity, ultimately harming democracy. He emphasized that such a situation makes it difficult for Nigerians to see themselves as one nation.
Awosoro further cautioned that the long-term impact of disinformation is the fragmentation of the country, weakening its national identity and deepening existing societal divisions.
On his part, Raji Olatunji, a disinformation analyst with the Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD) West Africa, warned that disinformation poses serious risks to inter-ethnic relations in Nigeria, as it reinforces negative stereotypes and false narratives that can escalate tension.
He noted that the actions of bad actors spreading such falsehoods could have dangerous consequences, including inciting hate crimes against targeted communities, deepening existing biases, and fostering hostility among ethnic groups.
FILE PHOTO: Raji Olatunji.
According to Olatunji, Nigeria’s complex ethno-religious landscape makes it particularly vulnerable to the destabilizing effects of disinformation, emphasizing that once these narratives take hold, they can quickly spiral out of control, leading to real-world violence and instability across the country.
“The dangers can be far-reaching for Nigeria’s political stability and social cohesion. As it fuels sectarian tensions, it creates more divisions within societies, and the public perception of the country’s ability to conduct free and fair democratic processes becomes negative. By implication, it undermines trust in both public and political institutions,” said Olatunji.
Existing divisions and 2023 general election
Experts said these inflammatory narratives thrive due to long-standing ethnic divisions in Nigeria, fuelled by many past inter-ethnic conflicts dating back to the Nigerian 1967 Civil War. By the time the war ended in 1970 with Biafra’s surrender, over two million people had died, and millions more were displaced.
However, they noted that the 2023 general elections reignited these tensions across Nigeria like never before. Even though the elections are over, millions of Nigerians are still grappling with the fallout from the deeply divisive election campaigns.
During the 2023 elections, politically motivated tribal disinformation spread like wildfire across social media. Peter Obi, the Labour Party candidate, was accused of being sympathetic to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), the southeastern secessionist group. Meanwhile, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, now Nigerian president, faced opposition in the South for not selecting an Igbo or Christian running mate.
Politicians weaponized ethnic divisions for political gain, fueling pre-existing tensions. The elections witnessed a peak in tribal hostility, particularly between the Igbo and Yoruba communities.
While most citizens initially saw the competition between candidates from both ethnic groups as normal, political actors deliberately instilled discord by making inflammatory comments and spreading divisive narratives. In response, many citizens, feeling the need to defend their ethnic identity, likely fell for their agenda.
Throughout the election period, there was a constant tribal battle online and offline. People engaged in heated debates to defend their candidates and ethnic backgrounds. Hate speech, misinformation, and false accusations were widely circulated to discredit opposing groups.
In Lagos, for instance, political actors fueled conspiracy theories that Igbos were attempting to “take over” the state after Peter Obi won Lagos in Nigeria’s 2023 presidential election. In the weeks leading up to the gubernatorial election, social media platforms were flooded with messages warning that the Labour Party’s gubernatorial candidate in Lagos State, Gbadebo Rhodes-Vivour, intended to empower IPOB if elected.
The messages falsely claimed that if he won, he would lay off Yoruba civil servants and replace them with Igbos. Although Rhodes-Vivour hailed from Lagos, his Igbo ancestry became a major talking point during the disinformation campaigns against him.
The phrase “Yoruba Ronu” (which translates to “Yoruba, think”) became a rallying cry against him, spreading rapidly on social media and eventually leading to real-life consequences.
As tensions escalated, hate speech and threats circulated widely. A viral video showing Musiliu Akinsanya (MC Oluomo), a well-known Lagos-based member of the APC and National Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW) warned voters to stay home if they weren’t planning to support the ruling APC party. Following widespread outrage, he later dismissed his remarks as a joke.
These narratives fuel ethnically charged voter intimidation, violence, apathy and election rigging. Reports indicated that the elections were marred by attacks, suppression, and disenfranchisement.
BusinessDay described Nigeria’s 2023 elections as possibly the most divisive in the nation’s history since the return to democracy in 1999. The report detailed how the election has led to enmity between the Yoruba and Igbo people in markets, churches, workplaces, and other social spaces.
Speaking with The FactCheckHub, a Nigerian lawyer, Abdulwasiu Mujeeb, noted that such divisive narratives peddled by these disinformation actors could fall under hate speech because they are capable of inciting various ethnic groups against one another in the country.
He said: “First, we need to understand the foundation. In Nigeria currently, there is no holistic act or enactment directly prohibiting hate speech, but that doesn’t mean there’s no law or there is no section in any particular enactment or whatsoever that prohibits it.
Barrister Abdulwasiu Mujeeb. SOURCE: LinkedIn.com
“For instance, the National Broadcasting Code 2016 talked about the transmission of hate speech. There are also some particular sections in the Nigerian constitution prohibiting incitement of violence or breaching of public peace. These are things that can regulate hate speech in Nigeria whether there’s direct enactment or not,” he said.
Mujeeb noted that the first attempt to criminalize hate speech in Nigeria was in 2019 with the introduction of the Hate Speech Bill, although it failed to pass at the National Assembly.
He explained that, according to the bill and some sections of the NBC Code, hate speech is defined as attempts to create obnoxious content, incite violence or hatred against specific tribes, or breach public peace through statements, tweets, and other actions.
“So, it’s sufficient to say the definition of hate speech in these laws that we mentioned earlier has captured what these actors post. The fact that some Yoruba or Igbo people did something bad or committed a crime doesn’t mean all the members of that ethnic group do that. So, it suffices to say it’s hate speech.
“When you look at the comments under these posts, you will realise that they have been caught in the web of the definition. They have successfully incited violence against a tribe judging by how the people in the comment section are reacting to these posts,” he said.
Experts call for media literacy, accountability
Awosoro emphasized the urgent need for social media platforms to take stronger action against ethnic disinformation, noting that while these platforms have community standards in place, enforcement remains weak, particularly against accounts that consistently spread ethnic hate.
He urged them to collaborate with local fact-checkers who understand the cultural context and can identify harmful content more efficiently. Additionally, he criticized the algorithms that amplify hate-driven content for engagement, questioning why posts designed to incite tribal hate continue to go viral on social platforms.
Awosoro highlighted the importance of encouraging people to think critically before sharing information. He stressed that simple questions like “Who posted this? What’s their agenda? Can I verify this?” could significantly curb the spread of disinformation.
Olatunji pointed out the need for strategic and strengthened partnerships among key stakeholders to combat ethnic-targeted disinformation in Nigeria and highlighted the role of social media platforms in addressing the issue. He stressed that algorithmic changes are necessary to curb the spread of harmful narratives while ensuring the effective implementation of robust content moderation policies.
According to Olatunji, these efforts should involve credible civil society actors and fact-checkers who can provide cultural context and help identify problematic content. He also called on government agencies to take a more proactive approach in tracking and holding disinformation actors accountable.
“Massive media literacy and community-based educational programmes need to be deployed as part of the public awareness campaigns against such disinformation narratives,” he concluded.
A new report by the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) has warned that the impact of Meta‘s policy changes could be significant, with as much as 97% of enforcement actions in key areas like hate speech being discontinued.
The report notes that this shift could lead to an estimated 277 million pieces of harmful content spreading unchecked each year.
Recall that Meta‘s recent overhaul of its content moderation policies has raised critical questions about the safety of its platforms, the spread of harmful content, and the company’s commitment to combating misinformation.
The policy changes, announced on January 7, 2025 include halting proactive enforcement of several policies on harmful content, reducing content demotion, eliminating independent fact-checking, and revising policies on hate speech, gender identity, and immigration.
One of the most pressing concerns raised in the report is Meta’s lack of clarity on which policies will no longer receive proactive enforcement. While the tech company has stated that it will continue enforcing rules against terrorism, child sexual exploitation, fraud, and drug-related content, it has not explicitly confirmed whether areas such as hate speech, violence and incitement and self-harm will still be proactively moderated.
The report states that the vast majority of Meta’s enforcement actions were previously proactive, meaning that if this system is dismantled, enforcement will rely almost entirely on user reports, which have historically resulted in far fewer actions against harmful content.
The CCDH argues that Meta must clarify the scope of this policy shift and how it plans to mitigate the risks associated with it.
The decision to demote less content that “might violate our standards” has also drawn scrutiny. Mark Zuckerberg had previously stated that limiting the reach of borderline content was an effective way to curb misinformation and prevent the spread of divisive narratives. However, Meta is now abandoning this approach without explaining why it is reversing a strategy it once described as successful.
The CCDH report questions what assessment Meta has made regarding the potential increase in misinformation and harmful content if this measure is discontinued.
Further controversy surrounds Meta’s decision to drop policies on content related to immigration, gender identity, and race. Leaked internal moderation guidelines reveal that statements such as “Black people are more violent than Whites” and “Trans people aren’t real” will now be allowed under the new rules.
The CCDH also questions whether Meta conducted any risk assessment on the impact of these changes, particularly for marginalized communities who may face increased online harassment asking whether the company engaged with affected groups before implementing these policy shifts.
The replacement of independent fact-checking with a crowdsourced “Community Notes” system has raised additional concerns.
The CCDH report notes that studies have found Community Notes ineffective in addressing divisive misinformation, particularly during elections or public health crises. It also highlights that the system often fails to reach a consensus on controversial topics, resulting in misinformation remaining unchecked.
In addition, the report questions how Meta intends to address these known weaknesses, especially given its past commitments to tackling election-related disinformation.
Meta’s decision to reverse its previous policy of limiting civic content in users’ feeds has also drawn questions. In 2021, the company justified reducing the visibility of political content by citing user feedback that it contributed to a negative experience.
However, the new policy will treat political content like any other, potentially amplifying misinformation and divisive rhetoric.
The CCDH report asks why Meta is making this change despite its own past research showing that civic content was more likely to be rated negatively by users.
Another key question revolves around Meta’s claim that it will relocate its trust and safety teams from California to Texas. Zuckerberg had suggested that this move will reduce concerns about bias in content moderation, but the CCDH report notes that Meta already has major content moderation operations in Texas.
It questions whether this move will result in a reduction of trust and safety staffing, particularly as the company shifts away from proactive enforcement.
CCDH argues that Meta has not provided adequate explanations for these sweeping changes, nor has it outlined a clear plan to prevent an increase in harmful content.
The report calls on legislators, regulators, journalists, and civil society to press Meta for answers on the real-world consequences of these policy shifts, urging greater transparency from a company that continues to shape global discourse.
AN X user, @prudenceoflago3, has posted a video purportedly showing Nigeria’s First Lady, Senator Oluremi Tinubu, engaging in a fisticuffs and heated exchange with a former Kogi Senator, Dino Melaye, when they were both in the National Assembly.
The video is being circulated in connection with recent remarks by the First Lady over allegations of sexual harassment involving Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan and the controversy surrounding the Senate’s seating arrangement.
During a recent TV appearance on AriseNews, Natasha accused Akpabio of inappropriate conduct, sparking national rage and calls for a thorough investigation. In response, Mrs Tinubu reportedly stated that the Senate is a “matured chamber” where “things like that” should not be heard, emphasizing that the institution should be treated with respect. She further advised women to assert themselves to prevent men from addressing them inappropriately.
To verify the claim, our researcher observed that the video shared was very blurry that one could hardly identify the people in the footage. The only easily established concept in the video is the setting of the National Assembly.
When our researcher ran keywords search “Lawmakers fought in the National Assembly” on Google search, it led to a Channels TVvideo that showed the original footage. The video depicts PDP lawmakers engaged in a brawl in the House of Representatives in 2013 over emergence of factions within the party.
The woman identified from the video is Binta Masi Garba, a lawmaker from Kaduna State and the then leader of the pro-Baraje nPDP faction. The man with whom she engaged in a fisticuffs and whose cloth was torn was Afeez Adelowo Onaara, a lawmaker from Oyo State.
According to a news report that also confirms the fisticuffs, the 2013 crisis within the then Nigeria’s ruling political party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) was marked by internal leadership disputes, disagreements over power rotation, and dissatisfaction with the party’s administration led by Bamanga Tukur. Tensions escalated when seven governors of G7 and other prominent members staged a walkout during the party’s national convention and formed a faction known as the New PDP (nPDP), which was led by Abubakar Kawu Baraje.
Additionally, our researcher observed that the fisticuffs happened in the lower chamber of the National Assembly while Oluremi Tinubu and Dino Melaye were senators in the upper chambers.
THE VERDICT
The claim that the video shows Oluremi Tinubu in a fisticuffs with Dino Melaye is MISLEADING, as the footage actually depicts PDP members Binta Masi and Afeez Adelowo engaging in a confrontation in the lower chamber over PDP factions in 2013.
META has announced plans to test its new ‘Community Notes’ feature across its social media platforms on March 18, 2025 as it shifts away from third-party fact-checking toward a crowdsourced approach to content moderation.
Recall that Meta’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, announced the transition to a user-driven Community Notes system in January 2025.
The initiative, similar to the system already implemented by X (formerly Twitter), will allow users of Facebook, Instagram and Threads to write and rate contextual notes on various content.
Meta said approximately 200,000 potential contributors in the United States have already signed up across the three platforms.
The new approach requires contributors to be over 18 years of age with accounts more than six months old that are in good standing.
During the testing period, notes will not immediately appear on content and the company will gradually admit people from the waitlist and thoroughly test the system before public implementation.
Meta emphasized that the notes will only be published when contributors with differing viewpoints agree on their helpfulness. “This isn’t majority rules,” the company said.
“Notes also won’t have penalties associated with them the way fact-checks did. Fact-checked posts often had their distribution across our platforms reduced. That won’t be the case with posts that have notes applied to them. Notes will provide extra context, but they won’t impact who can see the content or how widely it can be shared,” part of the statement reads.
Notes will be limited to 500 characters, must include supporting links and will initially support six languages commonly used in the United States: English, Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, French, and Portuguese.me
“Our intention is ultimately to roll out this new approach to our users all over the world, but we won’t be doing that immediately,” the company said.
“Until Community Notes are launched in other countries, the third-party fact-checking programme will remain in place for them,” it added.
Meta said that it would not be “reinventing the wheel” and will use X’s open-source algorithms as the basis of its system.
The FactCheckHub recalled that Meta Platforms Inc., the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, Threads and WhatsApp announced the termination of its third-party fact-checking programme in the United States, shifting instead to a “Community Notes” system earlier this year.
While these developments are positioned as efforts to improve freedom of expression, they raise concerns about the potential proliferation of disinformation campaigns, particularly celebrity death hoaxes on social media.
For instance, The FactCheckHubreported that Facebook has increasingly become the hotspot for spreading disinformation, especially fake deaths of celebrities and notable individuals. Disinformation experts raised concerns over the potential of the Community Notes system to fuel hoaxes of this nature.
More than 100 fact-checking organisations under the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) condemned the decision, warning that it will undermine online accuracy and have real-world consequences.
Fact-checkers expressed disappointment, arguing that the move threatens nearly a decade of progress in curbing misinformation in an open letter to Zuckerberg published earlier in January 2025.
They rejected Meta’s claim that fact-checking had become a tool for censorship, calling the statement ‘false’ and emphasising that their fact-checking programmes complied with strict nonpartisanship standards.
The Nigeria Police Force (NPF) has announced plans to intensify efforts in tackling misinformation and disinformation in the country, recognizing their potential to incite unrest and damage public trust in security agencies.
The Inspector-General of Police (IGP) Kayode Egbetokun disclosed this when the Director-General (DG) of Voice of Nigeria (VON), Mallam Jibrin Baba Ndace, paid him a courtesy visit on March 13, 2025, at the Force Headquarters in Abuja.
Speaking during the visit, Ndace commended the IGP for his leadership and proactive approach to security since assuming office.
He acknowledged the growing challenge of disinformation and its impact on public’s perception of security agencies, stressing that false narratives can undermine the credibility of the police and erode trust in governance.
He assured the IGP of VON’s readiness to work closely with the Force in combating the spread of misleading content that distorts reality.
In response, Egbetokun expressed appreciation for the support of the media, emphasizing that disinformation is a major threat to national security. He noted that misinformation often fuels public unrest and misrepresents the efforts of security agencies.
He welcomed VON’s commitment to using its platform to counter fake news and pledged the Force’s cooperation in ensuring that accurate information reaches the public.
The IGP reaffirmed that the NPF remains steadfast in upholding press freedom and recognize the responsibility of the media in ensuring factual and responsible reporting.
He urged journalists and media organizations to be vigilant in fact-checking and verifying information before dissemination to prevent the spread of falsehoods that could incite public disorder.
As part of its broader commitment to transparency and accountability, the Nigeria Police Force encourages open dialogue and constructive feedback from citizens and stakeholders, Egbetokun said.
The IGP assured the public that the Force will continue to operate with professionalism, integrity, and respect for democratic values while taking decisive steps to tackle the menace of misinformation and disinformation in Nigeria.
The FactCheckHub had previously fact-checked many social media posts targeted at the Nigeria Police Force and aimed to sow mistrust against security agencies.
For instance, an X user claimed that only police officers who have served as a Commissioner of Police in Lagos State can be appointed as Nigeria’s Inspector General of Police (IGP) – which we found to be FALSE.
To verify this claim, our fact-checker reviewed the Police Act of 2020, particularly Sections 7 and 8, which outline the appointment, tenure, and removal of the IGP. There is no section or subsection that stipulates a requirement for any officer to have served as Commissioner of Police in Lagos State before being appointed as IGP.
The FactCheckHub also debunked an old video posted by pro-Biafra agitator, Simon Ekpa, alongside a claim that some men of the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) generally assaulted their female colleagues.
During the End Bad Governance protest held in August 2024, a video purportedly showing protesters of #EndBadGovernancelnNigeria chasing ‘soldiers’ away with stones in Kaduna State surfaced online. Our findings show that the video is from the anti-finance bill protests held in Kenya earlier on July 16, 2024 – about 2 weeks before the Nigerian protests kicked off.
AN X user, @nolifefahard, has posted a video showing a former Nigerian president, Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, in a media interview alongside a claim that the ex-President allegedly exposed Omoyele Sowore for working with the current President, Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
Tinubu, who contested on the platform of ruling All Progressive Congress (APC), relied on his extensive political influence, while Sowore, the African Action Congress (AAC) candidate, positioned himself as a vocal critic of the political establishment. He also raised questions about Tinubu’s academic credentials and past legal controversies. Tinubu’s supporters, in turn, dismissed these allegations as politically-motivated and portrayed Sowore as an opportunist lacking a substantive political agenda.
Following the aftermath of the 2023 election, their rivalry played out on social media, with Sowore rejecting the election results and calling for electoral reforms. Since Tinubu’s inauguration, Sowore has remained a vocal critic, using his platform to challenge the Tinubu-led administration’s actions and advocate for transparency and accountability in governance.
To verify the authenticity of the video, our fact-checker extracted keyframes from the footage and conducted a reverse image search on Google search engine. This search led us to the source of the original video uploaded onDecember 4, 2012, by SaharaTV.
The video depicts a TVC News coverage of then President Jonathan addressing State House audience following the death of his younger brother, Meni Jonathan, who passed away on November 8, 2012. Another report published by PM News shows that the ex-President had an audience with some Nigerian lawmakers from the South-South caucus at the State House.
The 13-second clip shared by the claimant is part of this address, where Jonathan commented on how he heard the news of his brother’s death which can be found from 28 seconds to 48 seconds of the original 141-second video.
Part of the transcript read: “Then, my doctor came in with my ADC and my CSO and the way they came in I knew that something was wrong and they announced his death. So, while I was still receiving the ambassador, he passed on about 11am. I didn’t know. In fact, even Sahara Reporters announced it before I even knew about it” (sic), Jonathan said in the video.
After a thorough review of both the claimant’s video and the full interview, our fact-checker found no mention of either Tinubu or Sowore in the videos.
Further checks confirm that the context in which Jonathan was speaking in the video is unrelated to any political matter but shows the former president mourning his brother’s death. This was also corroborated by another X user, @SuoazOfficial, who posted the same video on the social media platform on November 17, 2024.
THE VERDICT
The claim that the video shows Jonathan exposing Sowore for working with Tinubu is MISLEADING; the video has been online since 2012 and shows the former president addressing State House audience following his brother’s death.
AN X user, Mohammed Jammal (@whitenigerian), has claimed that Nigeria recorded the lowest terrorism attacks in the last 10 years while citing an infographic attributed to Channels TV.
“Terrorist attacks in Nigeria at its lowest in over a decade,” the caption on his X post read.
The post has garnered over 250,000 views, with more than 700 reposts and over 2,500 likes as of March 12, 2025.
CLAIM
Nigeria recorded the lowest terrorism attacks in a decade.
THE FINDINGS
Findings by The FactCheckHub show that the claim is TRUE, according to the 2025 GTI.
The Global Terrorism Index (GTI) is a comprehensive study analysing the impact of terrorism for 163 countries, covering 99.7 per cent of the world’s population.
Produced by the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) using data from Terrorism Tracker and other sources, the GTI produces a composite score to provide an ordinal ranking of countries on the impact of terrorism. The GTI scores each country on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 represents no impact from terrorism and 10 represents the highest measurable impact of terrorism.
Year
Incidents
Deaths
Injured
2024
99
565
177
2023
145
524
89
2022
120
385
147
2021
204
448
161
2020
–
–
–
2019
411
1245
419
2018
562
2040
772
2017
411
1532
852
2016
466
1832
919
2015
588
4940
2786
2014
662
7512
2246
Figures for Nigeria in the Global Terrorism Index, 2014 – 2024 reports. Source: GTI.
According to its latest ranking, released on March 5, 2025, Nigeria recorded 99 terrorism incidents in 2024, which is lower than the 145 incidents recorded in 2023. This is the lowest number of terror attacks recorded since 2014, according to previous Global Terrorism Index reports of the last 10 years reviewed by The FactCheckHub.
However, the number of deaths as a result of terrorism was 565, which is higher than the 524 and 385 recorded in 2023 and 2022, respectively. This was also reported by Channels TV on March 10, 2025.
However, the country rises in ranking to sixth in 2024 from eighth place it was in 2023 and 2022, among the top 10 countries most impacted by terrorism in the world.
The 2025 GTI report shows that while attacks in Nigeria decreased by 37 per cent, deaths from terrorism continue to rise, increasing by six per cent to 565 in 2024, and thus marking the highest death toll since 2020 due to ongoing conflict between Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) and Boko Haram.
CREDITS: 2025 GTI report.
Together, fatalities attributed to these groups accounted for nearly 60 percent of all terrorism-related deaths in the country.
Five terror attacks that occurred in Nigeria in 2024 were also ranked among the world’s 50 most devastating.
The attacks, which took place in Yobe and Borno states, were carried out by Boko Haram and the Islamic State West Africa Province and ranked 7th, 9th, 24th, 30th, and 33rd on the global list in the report.
According to the report, the deadliest of the Nigerian attacks occurred on September 1, 2024, in Yobe State, when 100 people were killed in an armed assault by Boko Haram.
The attack was ranked the seventh-worst terrorist incident globally in 2024.
Another major attack took place on April 24, 2024, in Borno State, where 85 people lost their lives in an ISWAP-led armed attack. The attack was ranked ninth globally.
Other attacks in Nigeria listed in the report include an ISWAP attack on September 1, 2024, in Yobe, which resulted in 37 deaths and was ranked 24th; a jihadist attack in Borno on May 26, 2024, that claimed 30 lives and was ranked 30th; and a bombing by an unidentified jihadist group on June 29, 2024, in Borno, which also killed 30 people and was ranked 33rd among the world’s 50 most devastating incidents.
THE VERDICT
The claim that Nigeria recorded the lowest terrorism attacks in a decade is TRUE. However, the country shifted in ranking to 6th among the top 10 most impacted by terrorism from 8th position it was in 2022 and 2023, accounting for a very high number of deaths and some of the most devastating terrorism incidents in the world.
EDITOR’S NOTE:
* Infographic has been added to this report to replace the earlier featured image of Boko Haram terrorists.
AMIDST increasing efforts by fact-checking organizations globally to empower the public with information resilience skills, hoaxes, particularly those of celebrity death, continue to spread on Meta’s Facebook.
The FactCheckHub investigates some accounts identified for spreading such hoaxes on the social media platform and examines how replacing the third-party fact-checking programme with community notes could further exacerbate this disinformation practice.
While these developments are positioned as efforts to improve freedom of expression, they raise concerns about the potential proliferation of disinformation campaigns, particularly celebrity death hoaxes on social media.
Meta’s transition to Community-based moderation
Meta’s Community Notes model draws inspiration from a similar feature on X (formerly Twitter). This approach empowers users to add contextual notes to posts they deem misleading, thereby decentralizing content moderation.
Meta’s CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, emphasized that this move aims to “allow more speech by lifting restrictions on some topics that are part of mainstream discourse.” This policy change is expected to be implemented across its platforms globally by 2026.
However, the fears of many people remain how effective the community notes is in curbing the spread of misinformation and tackling disinformation online, drawing perspectives from the X-style model which is already in use.
Celebrity death hoaxes on Facebook
Meta platforms, particularly Facebook, have increasingly become the hotspots for spreading disinformation, especially fake deaths of celebrities and notable individuals. The FactCheckHub uncovered some accounts perpetrating this scheme. Such act has been carried out for a long time in some Facebook groups monitored.
In some of these groups, some of the posts contain false death narratives of celebrities and other notable personalities. Activities of these accounts appeared to be coordinated influence campaigns. For instance, a Facebook account, News US1, posted a fake death of Mike Tyson after the retired heavyweight champion attended the inauguration of Donald Trump with Jake Paul in January 2025. This was earlier debunked by The FactCheckHub.
Despite the verification, many Facebook accounts continued to share the fake Tyson’s death in February 2025. For instance, news NNC, postedthe same claim on February 1, 2025. It was shared by 21 other users though it has few reactions and comments. Also, another Facebook user, Ben, posted the same claim on February 12, 2025. It garnered over 390 shares, plus 67 shares and 20 likes as of February 15, 2025.
Notably, the same claim was also shared in groups like video fee, US1, UN SOS2025 and Bringnow, among others. All these claims were shared in similar manner, with the same images and captions.
Screenshot of the claim retrieved from Facebook. INSERT: FALSE verdict.
Our fact-checker observed that Mike Tyson made a post on Facebook on February 11, 2025, the same platform where disinformation about his death was being spread. He posted a picture of himself with some kids putting on boxing gloves with a quote that reads: “It’s all about the next generation of fighters, I’m heavily invested in their future’”.
Justin Bieberis one of the celebrities affected by such hoaxes. Another social media user Rrong Rong posted the claim about Bieber’s death on February 7, 2025 in a Facebook group with no fewer than 59,000 members.
Checks by The FactCheckHub show that the claim is FALSE as Justin Bieber is alive. He posted some photos showing him and his girlfriend on Instagram on February 14, 2025 to mark Valentine’s Day – days after his death was announced on Facebook.
Rumours about his death have circulated multiple times on social media previously, most times stemming from hoaxes. For instance, false media reports that he had died in March 2023, was debunked by Snopes.
A post about the fake death of Justin Bieber retrieved from Facebook. INSERT: FALSE verdict.
Similarly, rumours about his death in a car crash in September 2024 were found to be FALSE, according to Fact Crescendo.
Another celebrity affected by these hoaxes is Simon Cowell, a British television producer, talent show judge, and music executive known for creating and judging hit shows such as American Idol, The X Factor, and Britain’s Got Talent e.t.c. The same Facebook account posted the false death of the TV host which gained traction online.
Findings by The FactCheckHub revealed that the claim is FALSE. As of February 19, 2025, Simon Cowell is alive and actively involved in his professional commitments. He posted a video on Instagram to announce the resumption of the ‘Britain Got Talent’ show, an audition show where he acted as one of the judges.
Recently, during the one of the audition, Cowell experienced a near-miss incident where a blindfolded performer, attempting to smash watermelons with a mallet around him, lost grip, leading to intervention by the crew to ensure his safety. This event left Cowell visibly shaken but unharmed as reported by Standard UK.
Celine Dion is another celebrity whose alleged death went viral on Facebook. A Facebook user named ajanimanlking posted a video reel on February 8, 2025 announcing the death of the popular R & B musician. But findings by The FactCheckHub show that the claim is FALSE.
Recall that Dion has been the subject of multiple death hoaxes over the years. Notably, in November 2013, false reports claimed she had died in a car or plane crash, which she promptly refuted as reported here.
Recently in 2023, misleading information circulated widely, often rehashing old health news to falsely alleged her demise, but it was debunked by Snopes.
On February 14, 2025, the musician however announced her upcoming album billed to be released in April 2025 via her official Facebook page. This corroborates her living status.
Similarly, Snopes had earlier debunked false claims that American rapper and actor, Jaden Smith, and British actor Rowan Atkinson had died. Also recall that in August 2023, Lil Tay’s Instagram account was hacked, leading to a post that falsely reported the teen rapper’s death, Meta confirmed. These are but few among other celebrity death hoaxes that went viral on the Meta platform while some have made it to the mainstream media, a Poynterreport observed.
Meta could not be reached for official comments as at the time of filing this report, but we will update this report if we receive any response from the social media platform.
Potential risks of increased disinformation — Experts
The reliance on community-driven moderation raises concerns about the spread of false information, including premature or false reports of individuals’ deaths. Without professional fact-checkers, the responsibility falls on the user base, which may lack the expertise to accurately assess and debunk such claims. This could lead to the rapid dissemination of unverified or false information, causing unnecessary distress and confusion among members of the public, experts said.
Speaking with The FactCheckHub, Cole Praise, a fact-checker with Dubawa, emphasised the effectiveness of Facebook’s third-party fact-checking system when compared to X’s (formerly Twitter) Community Notes.
Praise argued that Facebook’s approach, which relies on users to police content, is ineffective because most users prioritize engagement over accuracy. He noted that misinformation spreads easily on Facebook since users are not conscious of verifying content before sharing.
“Fact-checkers were doing a great job serving as watchdogs to make sure that whatever content is passed is actually authentic. But now that it’s been erased by 2026 globally, I really do not see the situation getting any better. I think it will just get worse,” said Praise.
From Praise’s experience as a fact-checker, removing professional fact-checkers from Meta platforms will only worsen the spread of disinformation. He noted that for every claim verified, a misleading Facebook version often exists, which is rarely flagged as false. Instead, users like, share, and comment without questioning its accuracy. He emphasised that Facebook has not yet reached a stage where user-driven content moderation can replace dedicated fact-checkers and urges the platform to reinstate them for better content verification.
“While community fact-checking decentralizes the verification process and allows users to flag claims that may escape journalists, it also has serious limitations,” Adebajo explained.
“Many contributions lack professional rigor, are sometimes biased, or prioritize humour over accuracy. This is particularly concerning for misinformation in local languages, where professional newsrooms with linguistic expertise play a crucial role in verification,” he said.
He emphasised the need for a hybrid approach, combining professional fact-checking with community notes, while urging tech companies to collaborate closely with journalists to curb the spread of harmful misinformation.
Adebajo emphasized that many cases of misinformation are not driven by a deliberate intent to harm but by the pursuit of engagement through clickbait tactics.
“Social media algorithms often prioritize tragic or shocking news, such as the death of celebrities, because these stories attract more interactions,” he explained. This increased engagement helps pages gain followers, which can then be leveraged for website traffic or commercial gain.
Adebajo stressed that while journalists play a vital role in countering such misinformation, they cannot do it alone. He called for stronger collaboration between newsrooms and social media platforms through initiatives like third-party fact-checking programme, among others. These programmes, he noted, not only enable the hiring of full-time fact-checkers but also equip journalists with better verification skills.
“Tech companies should go beyond limiting the reach of false claims by imposing large-scale sanctions on those who repeatedly spread misleading information, especially when it involves coordinated networks of pages,” Adebajo opined.
Also speaking with The FactCheckHub, Ebunoluwa Olafusi, the Fact-check Editor at TheCable, describes Meta’s ending of its third-party fact-checking programme as a setback in the fight against misinformation on social media. With platforms like Facebook serving as primary news sources for many, she warns that distinguishing between true and false information will become more challenging. This change, she argued, could lead to an increase in misinformation, making it harder for users to verify facts.
She also highlighted the influence of social media influencers, whose followers often accept their content without questioning. In cases where influencers share false claims—such as fake death reports — users may spread disinformation before corrections appear.
Olafusi raised concerns about the reliability of Community Notes, especially when users fail to engage with fact-checking efforts or add biased interpretations that align with their views, echo chamber or confirmation bias.
The shift from structured fact-checking to community-based moderation, coupled with federal directives limiting government’s intervention in content moderation, creates an environment where misinformation and disinformation can thrive, she added.
False reports of individuals’ deaths are particularly disturbing, as they can spread rapidly and cause significant harm to the individuals or families involved. Social media platforms must find a balance between promoting free speech and implementing effective measures to prevent the spread of disinformation, analysts say.
EDITOR’S NOTE:
* This report has been updated to reflect Meta’s plans to implement ‘Community Notes’ globally in 2026.
A new report from the Knight-Georgetown Institute (KGI) in the United States has called for a fundamental shift in how social media and online platforms design their content recommendation algorithms.
The report titled: Better Feeds: Algorithms That Put People First, warns that the current engagement-driven systems fuel misinformation, promote divisive content, and compromise social media users well-being. Instead of optimizing for clicks, likes, and time spent on platforms, the authors advocate for a model that prioritizes long-term user satisfaction and societal benefits.
The report, by the Washington D.C.-based institute, highlights how major online platforms, including social media giants like Meta, TikTok, and X (formerly Twitter), rely on recommendation algorithms that maximize engagement at the expense of user’s welfare.
These systems prioritize content that generates immediate reactions such as outrage, controversy, or sensationalism without considering the long-term effects on individuals and communities.
The report states that, “Maximizing the chances that users will click, like, share, and view content this week, this month, and this quarter aligns well with the business interests of tech platforms monetized through advertising.”
It stresses that this short-term focus can contribute to “the spread of low-quality or harmful information, reduced user satisfaction, problematic overuse, and increased polarization.”
To reform recommender systems, the report proposes a three-pronged framework. First, it calls for platforms to publicly disclose how their algorithms rank content, including data sources, weighting methods, and the metrics used to evaluate long-term user value.
Second, it suggests that users should be given the ability to switch between different recommendation models, with minors automatically receiving content designed to promote well-being.
Third, it recommends that platforms conduct year-long studies to analyze the long-term effects of algorithmic changes and make these results public.
Instead of relying solely on engagement-based ranking, the report explores alternative models. Bridging systems should prioritize content that fosters constructive dialogue and diverse perspectives rather than reinforcing echo chambers, it notes.
“Platforms must offer users an easily accessible choice of different recommender systems. At least one of these choices must be optimized to support long-term value to users,” the report recommends.
It also recommends that platforms should collect direct feedback from users on content quality and satisfaction to refine recommendations, adding that systems should factor in credibility, informativeness, and safety in ranking content rather than just engagement metrics.
The findings come at a time when governments around the world are scrutinizing the role of algorithms in shaping public discourse.
The European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA) has already implemented transparency and risk assessment requirements for online and tech platforms, and several U.S. states have passed laws targeting social media algorithms that disproportionately affect minors.
Despite legislative interest, many regulatory efforts have been challenged in court on First Amendment grounds. The KGI report suggests that instead of outright bans on personalization or chronological feeds, a more nuanced approach is needed—one that encourages responsible algorithmic design while preserving user experience.
The report emphasizes that the goal is not to eliminate recommender systems but to refine them to serve users and society better.
“By following this expert working group’s guidance summarized below, platforms and policymakers can help to address the harms associated with recommender systems while preserving their potential to enhance user experiences and societal value.
“This report serves as a roadmap for any policymaker or product designer interested in promoting algorithmic systems that put users’ long-term interests front and centre,” the report concludes.