David Bridges
The anticipated return of Donald Trump to the White House for a second term is expected to significantly influence Meta’s business strategies and operational planning. As the political landscape shifts, Meta is likely to reassess its policies and approaches to better align with the new administration’s direction.
In a strategic move reflecting this alignment, Meta has introduced three new board members: Exor CEO John Elkann, investor Charlie Songhurst, and UFC president Dana White. This diverse group brings a mix of business acumen, investment insight, and a connection to the entertainment industry, which could prove beneficial as Meta navigates its evolving landscape.
Dana White’s appointment stands out, particularly given his vocal support for Donald Trump. He played a prominent role at the Republican National Convention last year and was an active supporter of Trump’s 2020 campaign, even advocating for Trump at rallies. White’s influence may help foster a better relationship between Meta and the Trump administration.
Bringing a strong ally of Trump onto the Meta board could be a strategic step to mitigate potential conflicts with the incoming President, especially considering Trump had previously threatened to jail Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg due to perceived political biases. This tension stemmed from Meta’s decision to suspend Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts in 2021, a decision that drew criticism from allies such as Elon Musk, who has also been vocal about Zuckerberg’s actions.
In light of Trump’s re-election, Meta has been making significant adjustments to align itself with the second Trump administration. This includes the replacement of public affairs leader Nick Clegg, who was instrumental in the suspension of Trump’s accounts, with Republican Joel Kaplan, a Meta veteran advocating for a less interventionist approach to political speech across Meta’s platforms.
Moreover, Meta has restructured its public policy team to elevate Republican voices, while Zuckerberg has proactively met with Trump to resolve past differences. This move indicates a willingness to engage constructively with the Trump administration, paving the way for potential collaboration.
Additionally, White’s appointment to a crucial advisory position signifies Meta’s commitment to integrating influential voices into its decision-making process, potentially reshaping the company’s approach to political discourse.
From a user perspective, this shift could lead Meta to reconsider its previous stance on limiting political speech, possibly lifting restrictions on “political” commentary. Such changes could foster a more open environment for political discussions on its platforms.
Earlier in the year, Meta announced plans to restrict the reach of political content across its platforms, making political material optional for users who prefer to avoid exposure to such discussions. This approach aimed to minimize conflict and enhance user experience by allowing individuals to customize their feeds.
This strategy has been particularly challenging for Threads, Meta’s attempt at a real-time conversation app similar to Twitter. By limiting political discussions, Threads may be suffering from decreased user engagement, especially given its emphasis on real-time updates. Conversely, on Facebook and Instagram, Meta has determined that political discourse can lead to increased anxiety and lower user engagement, prompting a more cautious approach.
However, with influential figures now shaping its policies, Meta may reconsider its restrictions on political content, potentially making it more accessible and welcoming for users eager to engage in political discussions.
Meta possesses substantial political influence, boasting over 3 billion users across its suite of applications, far exceeding the reach of platforms like X. This extensive audience can play a pivotal role in shaping public opinion and facilitating political discourse, which was evident in the last election cycle.
Given these new connections with the Trump administration, it appears that Meta is poised to adopt a different strategy moving forward, potentially embracing a more hands-off approach to political discourse compared to its previous policies during Trump’s first term.
Whether this shift is advantageous or not depends largely on one’s perspective and how Meta navigates the complexities of political content moderation.
During Trump’s first term, Facebook imposed numerous sanctions on his posts for promoting divisive and inflammatory rhetoric, often tagging his comments with warning labels, much to Trump’s frustration. Navigating these challenges will require careful consideration as Trump resumes his political activities.
The ongoing censorship of Trump’s posts significantly contributed to his decision to create his own social media platform, Truth Social. This dynamic will change the landscape for Meta, as Trump’s reliance on Facebook and Twitter has shifted, potentially resulting in fewer moderation decisions for Meta.
Ultimately, how Trump chooses to engage with social media platforms, and whether Meta opts to distance itself from him over the next four years, will greatly impact the nature of their relationship. There will certainly be instances where Trump makes contentious claims, and it will be in these moments that the influence of board members like Dana White will be crucial.
At present, Meta’s moves appear to be geared more towards strategic business relations rather than ideological alignment, as they seek to improve their working relationship with Trump and his associates.
Additionally, given Zuckerberg’s known affinity for UFC, it’s likely that he may already have a rapport with Dana White, further enhancing the potential for a productive partnership between Meta and Trump’s circle.
