Zuckerberg’s Comments Fuel Disinformation Narratives and Anti-Fact-Checker Sentiment in Hungary

On January 7, 2025, Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta, made an unexpected announcement that the company would end its Third Party Fact-checking Program (3PFC) “starting in the United States”. In its place, Meta plans to implement a new model known as Community Notes, inspired by the “community fact-checking” system used by X (formerly Twitter), now owned by Elon Musk. 

Zuckerberg framed the decision as a return to the company’s foundational commitment to free expression, stating in a video accompanying the announcement: “It’s time to get back to our roots around free expression. We’re replacing fact checkers with Community Notes, simplifying our policies and focusing on reducing mistakes.”

Meta justified the decision by pointing to the perceived shortcomings of its fact-checking initiative, launched in 2016. In an official statement, the company asserted that “experts, like everyone else, have their own biases and perspectives. This showed up in the choices some made about what to fact check and how. (…) A program intended to inform too often became a tool to censor”. Meta further cited the allegedly high rate of errors within the program as a reason for its termination.

The announcement was met with sharp criticism from international and European fact-checking organizations. These groups challenged Zuckerberg’s narrative, arguing that his statements misrepresented both the work of independent fact-checking partners and Meta’s own previously lauded fact-checking system. Notably, Meta had until now expressed pride in the program’s effectiveness and had not publicly criticized it.

The European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN) emphasized in a statement that linking fact-checking with censorship is especially harmful as such false claims are already one of the driving forces behind harassment and attacks on fact-checkers. “Furthering these claims can only exacerbate an already dire issue affecting fact-checkers across the world” – the network predicted.

Following Zuckerberg’s statements, fact-checkers from several countries indeed reported a noticeable increase in harassment – not only targeting fact-checkers affiliated with Meta under the 3PFC, but also affecting, more broadly, fact-checkers that never worked with Meta (such as Lakmusz), along with other journalists and members of the independent media. 

In this case study, we turn our attention to Hungary, where we analyze the main narratives that emerged in response to Zuckerberg’s announcement and how these were integrated into existing political and media discourses. Specifically, we examine which elements were employed to provide new fuel to pre-existing attacks on fact-checkers, and how these developments have further shaped the climate of hostility toward independent media actors in the country.

Members of the HDMO consortium – and especially the fact-checking website Lakmusz, which has a significant audience reach thanks to its collaboration with popular new website 444.hu – have been the target of repeated smear campaigns. These attacks started even before the site became publicly accessible and have continued with waves of coordinated disinformation and intimidation. The attacks rely on a recurring set of narratives, which are often echoed by government-aligned media and influencers, but also appear across the wider political spectrum:

1. 1. They are censors who can take down content.
      Critics allege that fact-checkers possess the power to remove or suppress content on social media. These claims falsely present the role and influence of fact-checkers, suggesting they can “shut down” websites or pages. (Example: “It begins: Soros’s people are trying to shut down our site” – Vadhajtások, May 2022.)
   2. They are politically biased, their aim is to silence right-wing/patriotic voices, they serve globalist/liberal interests
      A frequent accusation is that Lakmusz is politically biased, favoring left-liberal ideologies and acting as an ideological enforcer. Members of the government-linked Megafon influencer group have repeatedly claimed that the real purpose of fact-checking is to suppress right-wing viewpoints on platforms like Facebook. (Example: “They can’t win fairly, so they’re preparing to ban right-wing voices from Facebook [during the 2022 elections] – Kristóf Trombitás, October 2021.).Attacks also often paint Lakmusz as part of a broader conspiracy, acting in the interest of global elites rather than the public. The concept of the “global elite” varies depending on the ideological perspective: from a far-right standpoint, it may refer to international organizations such as the WHO, major tech companies, or the pharmaceutical industry. In populist narratives – particularly those promoted by pro-government actors – it is more commonly associated with the liberal Western elite, foreign governments, the European Union, or figures like George Soros. This framing claims that fact-checkers serve foreign interests to undermine Hungarian sovereignty and conservative values. (Examples: Mandiner, Zsolt Jeszenszky, Ultrahang).
   3. They are traitors and foreign agents.
      This narrative frames independent journalists and fact-checkers as threats to Hungarian national identity and independence. In a report published by the XXI. Század Intézet, a pro-government think tank,  Lakmusz had already been named as one of the media outlets that threaten Hungary’s “media sovereignty”. The study had been released in early 2023 – already before the foundation of the so-called Sovereignty Protection Office.
   4. They are self-appointed arbiters of truth.
      A recurring criticism of fact-checking organizations more broadly is that they have appointed themselves to this role and behave almost like oversight bodies or authorities. This concern was already voiced in June 2022 by Hungary’s National Media and Infocommunications Authority, which stated that the responsibility of fact-checking should not rest solely with online platforms or with organizations that have unilaterally appointed themselves to the role. This gave rise to the question echoed more widely: Who checks the fact-checkers?

The combination of these narratives were later echoed in a series of explainer-style videos posted on YouTube, which falsely portrayed fact-checkers as the ones who “decide what you can post online.” Another video, viewed nearly 10,000 times, claimed that fact-checkers interfere with how people consume news by inserting their own verdicts—labeling content as either true or false.

While most smear campaigns originate from the ruling party’s media ecosystem, criticism has also emerged from other ideological groups. In May 2022, László Toroczkai, leader of the far-right Our Homeland Movement, released a video on his YouTube channel (currently 270,000 subscribers), accusing Lakmusz journalist Eszter Neuberger of harassment. Rather than responding to her inquiry about his party’s dissemination of pro-Kremlin narratives, Toroczkai printed her questions and filmed himself in front of the U.S. Embassy, repeating the journalists’ full name 11 times.

Throughout the video, he implied that Lakmusz represents American and Jewish interests and claimed that Western censorship operates more subtly than Russian methods. He argued that so-called “globalist circles” create fact-checking sites like Lakmusz to act as “thought police” that interrogate and discredit individuals like him. He further suggested a conspiracy by pointing to tenuous links between Lakmusz and the Rothschild family (citing that a member of Lakmusz’ advisory board is the leader of the Hungarian Helsinki Committee, which is partially funded by the OAK foundation, whose advisory panel includes Barabra Rothschild as a member).

Three days after the publication of Toroczkai’s video, he participated in a video discussion together with András Schiffer, a prominent lawyer and former politician of the green LMP party. Schiffer criticized the practice of fact-checking from a free speech perspective, linking it to concerns over Big Tech, platform moderation, and censorship. He argued that “today fact-checkers are the greatest enemies of freedom in the word”  and they “pose as great a threat to freedom and democracy as the censors of totalitarian regimes”.

Such attacks have been accompanied by waves of online harassment, including ad hominem attacks, hate mail, and abusive comments directed at Lakmusz staff. Journalists at Lakmusz frequently find themselves the target of government-aligned actors, who often comb through their résumés in search of evidence pointing to liberal affiliations. They are regularly labeled “traitors” (“hazaárulók”) and called to be “removed” from the country. The smear campaigns have created a hostile environment for fact-checkers and reflect the broader challenges facing independent media in Hungary.

3. The European Union is a promoter of censorship.

In his video speech, Zuckerberg also criticised the European Union for allegedly institutionalizing censorship: “we’re going to work with President Trump to push back on governments around the world that are going after American companies and pushing to censor more. (…) Europe has an ever-increasing number of laws, institutionalizing censorship, and making it difficult to build anything innovative there” – he claimed.

Lacking substantiating evidence, Zuckerberg’s allegations appeared to reflect personal or political opinions regarding the European Union’s regulatory approach, rather than fact-based assertions. In response, the European Union firmly rejected these claims.

“We absolutely refute any claims of censorship on our side,” stated European Commission Chief Spokesperson Paula Pinho. Similarly, Thomas Regnier, European Commission Spokesperson for Tech Sovereignty, Defence, Space, and Research, clarified that the Digital Services Act does not mandate the removal of legal content, emphasizing that “it is only required for illegal content.” Echoing this sentiment, European Commission Vice President Henna Virkkunen told POLITICO: “We know that it’s not true. (…) “In Europe freedom of speech is one of our fundamental values and it’s also respected and protected [in] our Digital Services Act. So it’s very misleading also to say that.”

Since coming to power in 2010, Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán has frequently clashed with Brussels, which is withholding billions in financial support from Hungary over concerns about breaches of rule-of-law and democracy standards. Meanwhile, Orbán urges Hungarians to “resist Brussels”, declares offensives to “occupy Brussels”, and launches a range of unfounded attacks against the EU. Among his claims: that the EU seeks to “impose a Brusselite puppet government on the country”,  “drag the entire European Union into the war in Ukraine”, “force their migrants on us”, and “put our children in the hands of gender activists”. Claims about the EU being against free speech and promoting censorship also fit neatly into the EU-critical narrative and have started to be used by various pro-government actors following Mark Zuckerberg’s statements.

4. Targeting of journalists that never worked together with Meta.

As noted earlier, Meta launched its 3PFC program in Hungary in 2021, partnering – ever since – exclusively with the international news agency AFP.  Ede Záborszky, AFP’s Hungarian fact-checker, has publicly detailed his role and the workings of the 3PFC program in an interview with Mandiner in March 2021, providing transparency about the partnership.

However, fact-checking initially attracted little public attention or controversy. This changed several months later with the announcement of the Hungarian Digital Media Observatory (HDMO), a partly EU-funded anti-disinformation initiative involving two fact-checking partners: AFP and Lakmusz. While AFP remains Meta’s official 3PFC partner, Lakmusz has never collaborated with the company and has, in fact, been critical of Meta’s role in spreading disinformation.

Despite this, Lakmusz has often been inaccurately portrayed as part of its fact-checking efforts. Following recent remarks by Mark Zuckerberg concerning Meta’s 3PFC program, certain actors in Hungary seized on his comments to criticize fact-checking more broadly. These attacks, however, were not directed at AFP—the actual 3PFC partner—but rather at Lakmusz and other independent media outlets such as 444.hu, Telex, HVG and 24.hu.

For example, a pro-government influencer addressed a – rather critical – video to Zuckerberg, accusing him and several independent media outlets of censoring his page and supporting a leading opposition politician, Péter Magyar: “How many times have you banned my page because fact-checkers rented from 444 didn’t like that I, for example, don’t cry along with them for the migrants? You have been rewriting the truth with the same faces with whom you are now building your globalist puppet, Little Magyar Peti.”

Interestingly, AFP and its fact-checker Ede Záborszky were not targeted in this backlash. None of the reactions recorded mentioned AFP, suggesting that the criticism was less about actual partnerships and more about undermining trust in standard journalistic practice and in independent journalism in general.

5. Visual attacks linking fact-checkers to anti-LGBTQ narratives

While only two such posts were identified, they are notable due to the volume of engagement they generated, each attracting thousands of interactions, including numerous hateful reactions. These posts visually implied, without evidence, that fact-checkers are members of the LGBTQ community. Though styled more like memes than formal political commentary, they effectively served to incite hostility toward both fact-checkers and LGBTQ individuals simultaneously.

Both posts were shared by pro-government influencers shortly after Mark Zuckerberg’s public video statement. On January 7, Zsolt Jeszenszky posted an image alongside the claim that the Meta CEO wanted to “get rid of” fact-checkers. The post received approximately 2,600 interactions and was shared over 300 times.

In the first comment, Jeszenszky referenced leading opposition politician Péter Magyar and the independent fact-checking site Lakmusz, writing: “What will happen to you now, Péter Magyar and Lakmusz?” The comment section included responses such as:

• He will undergo sex-change surgery and participate at the Olympics.
• My ass is bleeding for them.
• They will find another form of political prostitution… The Red Aid is still operating today.

A day later, on January 8, another pro-government influencer, Bence Apáti, followed up with a similar post. He shared a meme-style image titled “The fired fact-checkers of Facebook” and added the caption: “Stay cool, they will go to Lakmusz.”

Source: Bence Apáti’s Facebook-post

The post garnered 1,400 interactions and more than 170 comments. Many of the comments contained overtly hostile and dehumanizing language. Examples include:

• “So many worthless people, ready for battle — off to Ukraine, that’s where they belong.”
• “To the front with you, scum.”
• “Dear little people!!!! What were you even doing in a place that should have been run and supervised by normal people??? You got what you deserved, we can only be glad!!!”
• “Unfortunately, there are many of them, and more and more openly admit it.
  It’s stomach-turning to see.”
• “These people regulated anything? This distorted mob decided who could say what publicly?”

This type of messaging aligns with long-standing anti-LGBTQ narratives increasingly promoted by the Fidesz government in recent years—rhetoric that culminated in legislation in March 2025 banning Budapest Pride. These posts reinforce existing stigmas by conflating two separate targets of government-aligned hostility: fact-checkers and the LGBTQ community.

6. Hungary’s main opposition party is the promoter of censorship.

The false narrative that “fact-checking is censorship” was reinforced by Mark Zuckerberg’s statement, and has also broadened in scope. As previously noted, Hungarian reactions have misleadingly claimed that censorship is supported by the European Union. At the same time, a new, equally unsubstantiated narrative has emerged, suggesting that Hungary’s main opposition party, the Tisza Party (especially its leader, Péter Magyar) also endorses censorship. In this way, three censorship narratives have been blended together, exemplified by a reel posted by a pro-government influencer:

“What hurts Petya and his gang is that social media in America has already scrapped that so-called “independent” fact-checking—which even Zuckerberg himself admitted only served the American left, who censored right-wing political content as they pleased. (…) While a new era has already begun on American social media, unfortunately over here, the EU’s censors still stand firm on banning and censoring right-wingers. And across Europe and in the EP, Péter Magyar and his people have become the loudest supporters of this, because the little Messiah wants the playing field on social media to keep tilting in his favor. And us right-wingers? We’re the ones getting censored. For them, freedom of speech is actually the target, and censorship is the weapon. But I’ve got bad news for you, Petya! We will not be silenced!”

1. Pro-government media

Publications of Eastern European Press and Media Foundation (KESMA):
Actors: Magyar Nemzet, Origo, veol.hu and other local outlets, HírTv, Pesti Srácok

A pro-government media conglomerate, KESMA encompasses a portfolio of more than 450 media outlets. It was established in 2018 through the contributions of media owners closely aligned with Fidesz. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has deemed it of national strategic importance, thus exempting it from competition law and media regulatory oversight. KESMA’s publications nearly entirely dominate the regional newspaper market and the national radio market. Additionally, it includes the country’s largest news portal, two television news channels, several tabloids, and the only legally authorized, freely distributed daily newspaper.

Publications of MTVA (Hungarian Media Service Support and Asset Management Fund):
Actors: hirado.hu, MTI

The state-owned public service media organization responsible for the country’s national television, radio, and online platforms, with an annual budget of 165 billion forints (over 400 million euros) in 2025. Over the years, MTVA has come under increasing criticism for spreading narratives closely aligned with the Hungarian government’s positions, often reflecting the ruling Fidesz party’s ideologies. Critics argue that the public broadcaster regularly amplifies government-approved viewpoints, including disinformation and pro-Kremlin narratives, while sidelining opposition voices.

2. Megafon influencer network

Actors: A kopasz (44,000 followers), Apáti Bence (51,000 followers), Bohár Dániel (86,000 followers),  Deák Dániel (159,000 followers), Déri Stefi (53,000 followers), Korondy Tamás (35,000 followers), Patrióta (221,000 subscribers), Szakács István (53,000 followers), Szarvas Szilveszter (26,000 followers), Trombitás Kristóf (49,000 followers), Végh Tamás (11,000 followers)

Megafon was founded in August 2020, with the goal of amplifying “Christian-conservative-national” voices on the internet. It provides various resources, including training, mentoring, and advertising, to influencers who spread the government’s narratives on various social media platforms, mostly in the form of short videos.

The nonprofit entity behind Megafon is owned by István Kovács, who also serves as strategic director of the Center for Fundamental Rights, a think tank closely linked to Hungary’s ruling party. The source of Megafon’s funding remains unclear. The company claims to have received 12 million euros from anonymous donors, but multiple investigative reports show that public funds also enter Megafon’s accounts in an opaque manner through various foundations.

Megafon Center trains and employs content creators who disseminate the government’s messaging across social media platforms including Facebook, YouTube, X, and TikTok, through videos, memes, and posts. Megafon officially works with 13 influencers and pays to promote their posts. Megafon is also connected to others more informally, whose content isn’t advertised, and manages anonymous pages that present themselves as local news outlets or grassroots meme accounts –  making it hard to know exactly how many people are involved in the Megafon network.

In a series of investigations, Lakmusz analyzed the group photos published about Megafon’s training sessions, and we used OSINT techniques to identify 450 individuals across Hungary connected to the government-affiliated influencer network.

In 2024, in 6 months leading up to the European Parliamentary and Hungarian local elections (June 2024), Megafon has spent over 2 million euros on Facebook advertisements – with this, Megafon not only became one of the largest players in Hungary’s advertising market but has also outspent the total political ad budgets of several European countries.

Research has also shown that Megafon spent over 1,3 million euros on advertising hostile narratives, such as attacking the European Union and discrediting the political opponents of Fidesz, using false and misleading statements.

Patrióta is a YouTube channel operated by Megafon, with 221,000 subscribers. Launched in 2021 in response to the left-wing Partizán channel, its goal is to represent traditional values and “normality.” In addition to videos posted by Megafon influencers, the channel also publishes analyses featuring right-wing experts, and several times, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán himself has given interviews to them.

Beyond political messaging, both Megafon and Patrióta have also been identified as sources of climate-related disinformation. Rather than outright denying climate change or human responsibility, these influencers often adopt a stance of “climate relativism” – downplaying the severity of climate-related challenges. Lakmusz, for example, has debunked false claims about climate change by Megafon influencers Kristóf Trombitás, and István Szakács. One notable example is an 18-minute video  posted on the Patrióta channel titled “This is how they LIE about CLIMATE CHANGE!”, which has been viewed by over 100,000 people.

3. Politicians

Fidesz:
Actors: Gál Kinga, Dömötör Csaba, Zsigmond Barna Pál, László András, Hidvéghi Balázs

A political party founded in 1988, which first held power between 1998 and 2002, and has been in government uninterrupted since 2010, in coalition with the Christian Democratic People’s Party. Over the decades, the party has undergone a significant transformation: from a liberal youth movement in the 1990s to a right-wing populist force by the 2010s. Through its constitutional majority, the party has effectively captured the state, the structure of which Prime Minister Viktor Orbán referred to as an illiberal democracy in his 2014 speech.

Since Hungary’s EU accession in 2004, Fidesz has had a European Parliament faction. From 2004 to 2018, it was a member of the European People’s Party (EPP), but from 2019 onwards, it joined the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group. The Fidesz party, alongside the Austrian Freedom Party, Italy’s Lega, and Spain’s Vox, is part of an anti-immigration, anti-globalist, and national sovereignty-promoting alliance.

One of Fidesz’s MEPs, András László, previously spread the government’s messages on behalf of Megafon, in English primarily on X (formerly Twitter). (It is unclear whether he continued to receive a salary from Megafon after being elected). After Donald Trump took office, the MEP/influencer was appointed to a government position with the task of investigating USAID’s beneficiaries in Hungary.

Mi Hazánk (Our Homeland):
Actor: Toroczkai László

A far-right political party established in 2018. It was founded by former politicians who left the Jobbik party after its shift to a people’s party, with László Toroczkai serving as its president. The party won six mandates in the 2022 elections. According to public opinion polls, Mi Hazánk is currently the only minor party that would still reach the parliamentary threshold in 2026. The party’s president has not ruled out a coalition with Fidesz, and the ruling party has already adopted several proposals raised by Mi Hazánk, such as the constitutional protection of cash usage and the fetal heartbeat law.

4. Other actors

Gábor Szűcs:
Member of the Nemzeti Ellenállás Mozgalom (National Resistance Movement), a GONGO similar to Megafon. Founded in December 2024, it  brings together various pro-government figures including Megafon-influencer Bence Apáti, Fidesz politician András László and various pro-government media personalities. It presents itself as a grassroots movement and promises some “offline actions”, but aside from its founders, there is no information available about additional members of the movement. In response to comments made by Mark Zuckerberg in January, the group launched a campaign to collect so-called “censorship stories.” Followers are invited to submit accounts via email if they have experienced content removal or account suspension on social media platforms. Among the founders, Gábor Szűcs has been the most vocal on the issue, participating in multiple interviews to promote the initiative.

ÖT:
Actors: Hont András, Czeglédi Zoltán, Nefelejcs Gergely
A political debate program that started in February 2024 on ATV television channel, now produced in cooperation with ATV and one of Hungary’s largest news portals, Index. The program features a recurring panel of commentators, including journalist András Hont, political analyst Zoltán Czeglédi, and lawyer and former opposition politician András Schiffer. In addition, anti-fascist activist and organizer Gergő Nefelejcs regularly contributes written content to the ÖT platform.

What unites the speakers is that they position themselves outside of the liberal consensus as non-governmental figures, often opposing the mainstream opposition opinion (for example, on issues like the Russia-Ukraine war or pandemic measures). Due to their unique position, their thoughts are often quoted by pro-government media, and they are regularly invited to events associated with Fidesz.

Members of the ÖT panel have consistently voiced criticism of fact-checking practices. In 2022, Schiffer called fact-checkers the “greatest enemies of freedom”, while Hont has repeatedly criticized and mocked Lakmusz on social media. In response to Zuckerberg’s remarks, both Nefelejcs and Czeglédi published opinion articles, echoing the false narratives that fact-checking is politically motivated and functions as a tool of censorship.

Vadhajtások:
Actor: Bede Zsolt

An anonymous website that has been operating for six years without a visible imprint or list of authors, which, based on its content, represents far-right and national radical views. Despite the lack of formal attribution, the site’s leadership has been openly associated with Zsolt Bede – a figure known for his far-right rhetoric – who has identified himself as its spokesperson since 2018. The site has sparked multiple criminal investigations due to its hateful and anti-Semitic statements, but these were suspended by the police due to lack of criminal offense or inconclusive results. A five-year-long investigation initiated by 444 was closed in 2024 with the reasoning that “it was not possible to obtain information about the individuals uploading content to the site.”

In the wake of Mark Zuckerberg’s remarks in January 2025, Zsolt Bede began posting inflammatory and hateful comments on the social media platforms of Lakmusz, using his personal Facebook profile.

1st Key Event: Zuckerberg’s video
(January 7, 2025.)

The news of Zuckerberg’s announcement spread rapidly through the polarized Hungarian media landscape, with over 20 articles published on official news sites within just three days. Notably, 15 of these were released on the day of the announcement itself. Independent media outlets – such as Telex, 444, HVG – typically reported on the change and Zuckerberg’s video statement in a factual, neutral tone. Some media outlets even offered a more detailed analysis and context (such as Forbes, Qubit), while Lakmusz fact-checked some of Zuckerberg’s false claims – including the narratives that suggest that fact-checking equals censorship and fact-cherkers are politically biased.

In contrast, government-aligned platforms simply echoed Zuckerberg’s misleading narratives about censorship and political bias, and consistently framed the ending of the 3PFC program as a positive step toward the restoration of freedom of speech. The Hungarian state news agency (MTI) – which has operated under strong government influence for years, as documented by multiple investigations from RFE/RL and Direkt36 – published an article with the headline: “Meta Ends Fact-Checking Program to Restore Freedom of Speech.” In this news bit, the state news agency went beyond merely reporting on Mark Zuckerberg’s announcement, and added a highly opinionated commentary, saying “[Meta’s] so-called ‘fact-checking’ has been described as selective, largely serving to silence conservative viewpoints”.

Given that most media outlets in Hungary rely heavily on MTI, this remark quickly circulated throughout the public sphere, not only repeated by pro-government outlets (such as HírTV, Maszol, Hetek, Magyar Demokrat), but also by some that are independent from the government, such as Pénzcentrum, Privátbankár and  Infostart – the latter running the headline, “A Major Reversal from Facebook Marks the End of a Hated Practice”. Euronews echoed the censorship narrative using the title: “Dramatic turn at Meta: Facebook censorship to end, fact-checkers to be dismissed”.

In addition to mainstream media coverage, pro-government influencers on social media – particularly members of the so-called Megafon network – were among the first to respond to Zuckerberg’s announcement. On the same day as the statement, three prominent Megafon-affiliated figures published Facebook posts accompanied by their own commentaries.

One of the most widely followed voices in the network, Dániel Deák (with approximately 155,000 followers), shared what he referred to as a “quick analysis”,  and stated that:

“[Zuckerberg] admitted that content had previously been censored in line with the interests of the globalists, but now they are firing the so-called fact-checkers, who often made it impossible for right-wingers to operate on the social media platform” – attributing words to Zuckerberg that he actually did not say in his video message.

On January 9, Deák Dániel and another Megafon-influencer, Kristóf Trombitás – who has  48,000 followers – followed up with Facebook-reals, offering their own commentary to Zuckerberg’s message. While Deák framed the downsizing of fact-checking operations as a victory for the Trump administration, and Trombitás described it as a “digital amnesty for right-wing voices,” he also noted that it was Zuckerberg himself who originally brought fact-checkers onto the platform. Now, he argued, the Meta CEO appears to be backpedaling in a state of panic – trying to shift the blame for the controversy squarely onto the fact-checkers.

On the day of Zuckerberg’s announcement, Zsolt Bede—a prominent far-right political activist and editor of the ultranationalist site Vadhajtások – entered the online discourse, posting vitriolic comments beneath older articles on Lakmusz’s Facebook page.

• Do you need a new job? 😀😀😀😀😀 lakmusz 💩💩💩
• What will happen to you? You can very well just delete your page…
• Just screech!  😂😂😂🤡🤡🤡

The Lakmusz article, published on January 8 and focused on fact-checking Zuckerberg’s announcement, drew the highest volume of negative comments (cca. 20) on Facebook—many of them derogatory in tone—from individuals including:

• Dear fact-checkers! Facebook is a private company, it’s not mandatory to work there. The market will sort it out.
• Did you really believe that you were doing fact-checking and not, in the most blatant way, contributing to the far-left, mentally ill “progressive” campaign to limit freedom of speech?
• Really, all that happened is that he admitted they were censoring, and that fact-checking is a tool of censorship. Well, I’ve thought that way all along. I hope Lakmusz will shut down soon.
• You’re fading away, propaganda rats. You’re out of fashion.
• It was about time! The fact checkers only published false information!

2nd Key Event: Patriots call for an investigation into “Meta’s censorship”

(January 10, 2025.)

On January 10, Fidesz MEP Csaba Dömötör announced in a Facebook reel that Patriots for Europe MEPs are calling for the establishment of a committee of inquiry into the “Facebook censorship issue” in the European Parliament.

According to Dömötör, Zuckerberg’s announcement “confirmed what many had suspected,” but he emphasized that “the story does not end here.” He added that the investigation would seek answers to questions regarding who exactly carried out the censorship, on whose orders, and whether this involved interference in the domestic political affairs of European countries.

Although there were a couple of English-language articles published about the Dömötör’s announcement (Daily News Hungary, Brussels Morning Newspaper, Hungary Today, About Hungary) the topic raised to the political agenda did not have a particularly strong impact in the Hungarian online space:  over the course of two days (January 10-11), a total of five articles were published about the announcement. Among these was an article by  Hiradó.hu, the state-owned news outlet, which, adopting the government-aligned framing, reported on the Patriotic Action as a move against “Facebook censorship.”

However, the issue was later elevated to the political level by a newly formed astroturf organization called the Nemzeti Ellenállás Mozgalom (National Resistance Movement), which launched a campaign urging individuals to submit personal accounts of being silenced by the online platform.

3rd Key Event: 444’s Opinion Piece

(January 13, 2025.)

On January 13, Márton Bede, a journalist from the independent news outlet 444.hu, published an opinion piece titled “The Most Coward Person in the World,” in reference to Mark Zuckerberg. While the article primarily criticized Meta’s CEO for his apparent alignment with the Trump administration, it also touched upon concerns regarding the legitimacy and utility of fact-checking initiatives:

“Naturally, there are legitimate arguments (…) that fact-checking as a genre is inherently meaningless, moreover, it is regularly deployed by political actors to reinforce their own narratives. What remains harder to justify, is to act like a coward—especially with 86 trillion forints in one’s pocket.”

[Disclaimer: While both 444.hu and Lakmusz are published by the same media company, Magyar Jeti Zrt., the two operate with fully independent editorial teams. Although Lakmusz content is featured on 444.hu’s platform, all editorial decisions are made separately, with no cross-influence between the news and fact-checking operations.]

The day following its publication, the article received significant attention from pro-government influencers affiliated with the Megafon network and was prominently featured in the evening news segment of Hungarian public television. Notably, these responses selectively framed the article as an attack on Mark Zuckerberg, portraying the author as opposing the termination of the fact-checking program. However, they omitted any reference to the article’s own critical stance on fact-checking as a concept, and included a number of false narratives about fact-checkers’ work and the work of Lakmusz. The following statements were delivered in a coordinated manner by influencers affiliated with Megafon:

• A kopasz oszt (41,000 followers):
  “The most cowardly person in the world! That’s how 444 describes Zuckerberg, whose platform is fact-checked by Lakmusz, by the way. All this because the founder of Facebook admitted that these fact-checkers were working based on political, globalist orders. Of course, 444 continues the fact-checking work even for the world’s most cowardly man, since the Brussels elite ordered Zuckerberg to keep these globalist, pocket-controlled fact-checkers in Europe. Honestly, I could even understand if someone thought fact-checking was so important that they heroically insisted on continuing it — even if I personally think fact-checking has never worked. But in that case, the honest thing for Lakmusz to do would be to leave Facebook and find another place to work — one where they’re not working for the most cowardly man in the world.”
• István Szakács (50,000 followers):
  “Good morning! Let’s just chew on this for a moment! So, while the little kitty boys at 444 were doing the fact-checking job and regularly thinning out right-wing content that way, Zuckerberg was the guardian of democracy. Now that the globalist pressure is off him and he no longer has to put tampons in the men’s restroom, suddenly he’s a coward. Or is this really all about the millions of dollars lost by 444? I’m completely confused!”
• Dániel Deák (155,000 followers):
  “It didn’t take long: the Soros network has issued the kill order on Mark Zuckerberg.❗️Mark Zuckerberg, the head of Facebook, announced last week that he would fire the so-called fact-checkers who had been censoring content in line with globalist expectations. He also admitted that the American left had been continuously interfering in what should be censored. It didn’t take long—Soros’s network has now gone after Mark Zuckerberg, and in Hungary, the campaign was kicked off by one of his most zealous propaganda outlets, 444. (…)”
• Bence Apáti (50,000 followers):
  “Censorship and the ‘fact-checking’ of ‘truths’ were only acceptable as long as 444 was the one doing it. But the moment online content no longer has to be moderated according to orders coming from Brussels or rural Ireland, suddenly it’s all about how Zuckerberg has knelt down, surrendered, submitted, been bought off—and not just that, he’s a coward, in fact; the most cowardly of all.”

Despite this misrepresentation, the 444 opinion piece contributed to a renewed wave of public discourse surrounding fact-checking. In the days that followed, additional articles and social media posts emerged that questioned the legitimacy, objectivity, and underlying motivations of fact-checking efforts.

4th Key Event: Dóra Dávid’s (Tisza party) speech at the European Parliament

(January 21, 2025)

On January 21, the European Parliament held a plenary debate on the enforcement of the Digital Services Act (DSA), focusing on safeguarding democracy on social media platforms. During the session, a notable exchange took place between two Hungarian Members of the European Parliament: Csaba Dömötör, representing the ruling Fidesz party, and Dóra Dávid, a member of the opposition Tisza party. Their clash over the interpretation and implications of Facebook’s recent policy changes brought renewed attention to the platform’s role in Hungary, injecting fresh momentum into the ongoing domestic discourse surrounding content moderation and fact-checking.

According to Dömötör, despite the ban in the United States, so-called “censors” remain active in Europe—often backed, he claimed, by American left-wing circles and funded in part by the European Commission.

In contrast, Dóra Dávid – a former legal advisor at Facebook – defended the fact-checking practices employed on social media. In her speech, she emphasized that while freedom of speech is a fundamental right, it should not be confused with the spread of false or misleading content, which could potentially influence election outcomes. She expressed concern over the growing trend among major platforms to eliminate independent fact-checking, which, according to her, could pose a systemic risk by facilitating the spread of disinformation and causing significant harm to democracy.

A total of seven articles were published across various pro-government platforms about Dóra Dávid’s speech, and her statements were covered in at least nine video commentaries. The videos aim to portray the Tisza Party and Hungarian MEP Péter Magyar as the most vocal European supporters of “political censorship” on Facebook, while suggesting that “the right-wing is finally freeing itself from moderation”. Additionally, these pieces imply that Péter Magyar and his party are attempting to maintain Facebook’s influence in the online space for their own political interests.

One video, for example, features the following commentary by Bence Apáti (Megafon): “Even Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Facebook, admitted that the ‘fact-checkers’ have been politically censoring on the platform. But one particular Hungarian party’s ‘Hungarian’ MEP really doesn’t want this censorship to stop. They are worried in Brussels 🤗.” In the video, the censorship is symbolized by a piece of tape over the speaker’s mouth.

Disclaimer:
The sole responsibility for any content supported by IPI lies with the author(s) and it may not necessarily reflect the positions of the IPI and EMIF and the Fund Partners, the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation and the European University Institute.