“Censors” or “Ministry of Truth”

An integral part of this disinformation is the nature of Meta’s Third-Party Fact-Checking Program and the role of fact-checkers within it. The social network has reached an agreement with Fact-checking outlets -all of them certified by the International Fact-Checking Network- to detect misinformation and hoaxes on Facebook, Instagram, or WhatsApp. Once fact-checkers have identified such practices, it is the company itself (Meta) that reduces their distribution and alerts users that the content has been identified as false. Although information about the work of fact-checkers within Meta’s Third-Party Fact-Checking Program is publicly available, certain social and political actors spread disinformation with an intent to harm fact-checkers’ professional reputation and present them as active agents of conspiracy against people.

This narrative has been adopted by disinformation purveyors and adapted to the specific context of each country:

Narrative: Faktograf is frequently accused of implementing censorship and restricting freedom of speech on Facebook, the main social network steering the political debate in Croatia and, therefore, one of the preferred channels for the purveyors of disinformation to disseminate non-verified information. Populists and extremists groups argue that Faktograf, through its work in Meta’s Third-Party Fact-Checking Program, is essentially acting as a “Ministry of Truth” by determining what information is deemed “correct” or “acceptable”. The organization is portrayed as stifling debate and suppressing what these extremist groups consider “alternative viewpoints”. This label “Ministry of Truth” is intended to delegitimize Faktograf’s role in fact-checking by painting it as an oppressive force.

Narrative: Maldita is similarly accused of acting as a censor. The organization is often referred to as part of a “Ministry of Truth.” This narrative suggests that Maldita is not an independent fact-checker, but rather a tool of powerful interests aiming to suppress what these groups consider “dissenting” opinions. The attacks on Maldita often claim that by labeling certain information as false, Maldita is censoring legitimate discourse. This accusation is particularly prevalent in discussions about the BuloBús (HoaxBus) initiative, where the organization’s efforts to combat misinformation are framed as a direct attack on free speech, further reinforcing the idea that Maldita functions as a modern-day “Ministry of Truth.”