- Meta disbands DEI programmes and alters content moderation policies ahead of the Trump administration’s return.
- The Legal Defense Fund exits Meta’s civil rights advisory group, citing lack of consultation and potential harm to protected communities.
What happened: Meta’s policy shifts prompt civil rights concerns
In early 2025, Meta Platforms Inc. announced significant changes to its internal policies, including the termination of its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programmes, the disbanding of fact-checking teams, and modifications to content moderation practices. These decisions were communicated to employees via a memo from Janelle Gale, Meta’s Vice President of Human Resources, citing a “shifting legal and policy landscape” as the impetus for these changes.
The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF), a longstanding member of Meta’s external civil rights advisory group, publicly announced its withdrawal from the group. In a letter addressed to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, the LDF criticised the company for implementing these policy changes without consulting the advisory group and for not considering the potential adverse effects on protected communities.
These developments have sparked internal dissent within Meta. Employees have expressed a range of reactions, from disappointment to support, regarding the rollback of DEI initiatives. Some staff members have voiced concerns that these changes undermine the company’s commitment to inclusivity, while others argue for a more uniform approach to workplace policies.
Also Read: Northern Data and Gcore team up on AI deployment
Also Read: OREX SAI and StarHub partner for 4G/5G Open RAN deployment
Why it is important
The recent policy shifts at Meta have significant implications for the company’s operations and its relationship with both employees and external stakeholders. The elimination of DEI programmes and changes to content moderation practices may affect the company’s internal culture, potentially influencing employee morale and retention.
Externally, these changes have prompted criticism from civil rights organisations and could impact Meta’s public image. The withdrawal of the LDF from Meta’s advisory group underscores the potential erosion of trust between the company and advocacy groups concerned with civil rights and inclusivity.
Furthermore, the timing of these policy changes, coinciding with the return of the Trump administration, suggests a strategic alignment with anticipated regulatory and political shifts. This alignment may influence Meta’s approach to content moderation and its broader corporate governance strategies.
