If you were wondering why Zuck and Co. were so keen to side with the Trump Administration, which has seen Meta alter its moderation policies to better align with right-wing talking points, this would be a key consideration in that approach.

This week, the new chairman of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) publicly criticized the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA), which he says is “incompatible with America’s free speech tradition.”

As per Carr:

“There is some concern that I have with respect to the approach that Europe has taken with the DSA in particular. There’s a risk that that regulatory regime imposes excessive rules with respect to free speech.”

Carr further noted that under Trump, the U.S. is “returning to our first amendment roots,” which will include fighting for such as required.

“From President Trump to me, across the government, we are encouraging our technology companies to stop the censorship we saw the last couple of years.”

Which is why Meta recently announced its coming shift to an X-style Community Notes model for content moderation, and the removal of third party fact-checking, while Meta has also revised its content rules around certain points of note among right-wing groups.

The impetus for this is clearly an alignment with demands from Trump himself, with Meta seemingly gaining the government’s backing to oppose certain international pushes, like the DSA.

Which could end up being a huge win for the company.

Over the last year alone, Meta has been fined over $1 billion in Europe for various violations, including an $841 million fine for breaches of EU antitrust rules, and a $263 million penalty for a past data breach. 

In 2023, Meta was also hit with a $1.3 billion fine from the European Data Protection Board (EDPU) related to the transfer of EU user data back to the U.S. without explicit permission or adequate protections in place, while the company was also fined $414 million for illegally forcing users to accept personalized ads in its apps. It also remains under investigation over other potential DSA and DMA compliance failures.

So Meta’s taking a significant financial hit every year as the EU regulations become more complex, and it does seem, at times, like Meta, specifically, is being targeted with these rules.

Which is why Meta’s been calling for U.S. government assistance in fighting such, and it seems that it may now get it, so long as it also plays its part by aligning with Trump’s own remands on moderation and censorship.

Indeed, last month, Vice President JD Vance also criticized EU regulations relating to AI innovation, while Trump has also threatened European imports with tariffs in penalty for tech regulations that harm U.S. companies.

It seems that this is what Meta will gain from its fealty to Trump, and given the scope of penalties already leveled against the company, it could well be worth that agreement.

From a business perspective at least.

From a social good angle, or a moral imperative, that could be a different consideration, as the effectiveness of Community Notes in dealing with content violations is questionable. Various reports have shown that Community Notes has failed to address some of the most harmful elements of political misinformation on X, and at Meta’s scale, that could be a significantly more concerning problem.

Thus far, Meta says that its changes in policy, ahead of the launch of Community Notes, haven’t resulted in any major spikes in “violating content”, though it’s too early to have any true indicators on the true impacts of this shift, and how it could change political debate in Meta’s apps.

But again, from a business perspective, it makes sense. And at the end of the day, Meta is a business.

It feels like Meta’s impact is such that it should have to factor in more than this, but really, it doesn’t. And it seems like Meta, the company, is going to get what it wants from its deal with the Trump team.