In northern India, a 20-year-old Muslim man was beaten to death by a mob after being accused of transporting cows, which are sacred to Hindus, for slaughter.
He was a victim of cow vigilantes who have documented their attacks in the name of "cow protection" in at least another 166 videos on Instagram.
It's this type of case experts point to as fears rise about the scaling back of fact-checking of social media content.
"Unchecked hate speech doesn't just stay online — it spills into the real world with deadly consequences," said Raqib Hameed Naik, head of the Centre for the Study of Organized Hate (CSOH).
Meta announced earlier this month that it would stop using independent fact-checking organisations to moderate content on the company's platforms Facebook, Instagram and Threads.
CEO Mark Zuckerberg said the fact-checkers had become "too politically biased" and his new plans would help ensure free speech.
But in places like India, Meta's largest market with more than 500 million users, Mr Naik warned that unchecked narratives posed a grave threat not only to online discourse but also to public safety.
What are Meta's plans?
Meta has relied on subcontractors to flag and debunk posts.
But the third-party fact-checking program that began in 2016 is being terminated in the United States and experts expect that it will be extended to other parts of the world in the coming months.
The ABC asked Meta about future plans but it wouldn't respond on the record.
For now in the US, Meta is turning to a feature called Community Notes that relies on platform users flagging potentially misleading content.
Notes are displayed once users reach a majority consensus on its accuracy.
Critics warn that if Meta's changes extend to fragile democracies like India, Myanmar and the Philippines, the consequences will include more polarisation, violence and social disorder.
"Some of these countries are highly vulnerable to misinformation that spurs political instability, election interference, mob violence and even genocide," the International Fact-checking Network (IFCN) said.
The Philippines: Dangerous labels with deadly implications
Across the region, social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp are the dominant sources of news for billions, making them particularly susceptible to disinformation, hate speech and political propaganda.
In the Philippines, Meta's fact-checking partners, including AFP and Vera Files, have played a crucial part in countering election-related disinformation.
Nobel laureate and Filipino journalist Maria Ressa warned of "extremely dangerous times ahead" for journalism and democracy.
Celine Samson, a fact-checker with Vera Files, said roles like hers were especially important during the last election.
Vera Files recorded a rise in misinformation posts that used a particularly dangerous tactic in the Philippines — portraying opposition leaders as communists.
While the term "communist" may seem relatively harmless elsewhere, in the Philippines, it can be life-threatening.
When fact-checkers flag false content, Meta can limit its reach or remove it if it violates standards.
"If there is a repeat offender of misinformation, it gets a label and lowered visibility and they lose their ability to monetise on the platform which I think is where it hits the most," Ms Samson said.
"Removing this program means one less layer of protection against misinformation."
Myanmar: A warning from the past
In Myanmar, Facebook is widely seen as "the internet".
During the 2017 Rohingya crisis, Facebook was found to have played a key role in the spread of hate speech, contributing to violence against the Muslim minority.
Despite pledges to address failures, Facebook remains a hotbed for disinformation there.
Naw Wah Paw, director of The Red Flag which focuses on research and social media monitoring, said the military and other actors were already well versed in evading detection and inciting violence.
"We are facing a rise in military misinformation, propaganda, and disinformation campaigns," said Naw Wah Paw.
"We've tracked posts that use terms like 'lay the eggs' to mean bombing or 'doing make-up' to mean hitting someone.
"Without fact-checkers, platforms like Facebook risk becoming even more chaotic."
She said Meta's fact-checking partners, which are required to meet strict non-partisanship standards, were vital when it came to understanding the local language and contexts.
Fears for the vulnerable
Meta has framed its decision to reduce fact-checking as a commitment to "free expression", but critics say this hands-off approach is risky.
"Mark Zuckerberg's claim that fact-checkers are 'biased' completely ignores how essential they are in regions where disinformation is a tool of oppression," said Jonathan Ong, a professor of global digital media at the University of Massachusetts.
"Zuckerberg's announcement signals to the world they're done apologising for social media harms and appeasing legacy media."
Professor Ong said he feared for regions that were already vulnerable.
"[He] positions Meta as a defender of free speech — at the expense of marginalised communities worldwide.
"The countries most harmed by unchecked social media … will now bear the heaviest burden of Meta's retreat from accountability."
[
Adi Marsiela, from Indonesia's largest fact-checking group Cek Fakta, said the changes were concerning for countries with low digital literacy rates like his.
Indonesia had more than 119 million active Facebook users and at least 100 million Instagram users last year.
Mr Marsiela said the COVID pandemic demonstrated the importance of checking social content.
"Hoaxes developed rapidly during the pandemic and fact-checkers were essential in combating misconceptions," he said.
Mr Marsiela highlighted the proliferation of fake job scams, and sensationalised environmental disaster content designed to boost engagement and monetisation.
"The algorithm promotes stories that are more interesting than relevant, which is why independent fact-checkers remain essential," he said.
