You're all very likely correct, but given the timing, it's hard to assume good intent on Meta's part. This same week, they've "donated" $1 million to Trump's "inauguration fund," and added strong Trump ally to Meta's board. Significant changes to moderation might be good or might be bad, but given the other news, only the truly ingenuous would trust that it's intended to improve things.

Same thing with when Bezos declared that the Washington Post would no longer be endorsing presidential candidates, claiming that it was a neutral decision about returning the paper to its roots with unfortunate but coincidental timing. Despite that potentially being a reasonable decision in a vacuum, only an idiot would have believed that Bezos was being honest about his motivation.