A quick general search legitimizes the claim leveled by MSN since a variety of separate new sources published similar articles. A key difference between the claims is in the titles. MSN claimed employees were fired for simply using food credits, but other articles elaborated that it was for misusing the food credits. CNN, for example wrote that, “Meta fired around two dozen employees from its Los Angeles office for misusing company meal credits for things like laundry detergent, wine glasses and acne treatment pads”. The Financial Times also covered this incident, explaining how Meta staff based in smaller offices without a canteen are offered credits for food to be delivered to their office. “Those who were fired were deemed to have abused the food credit system over a long period of time (while) those who violated the company rules only on occasion were reprimanded but not terminated”. BBC’s article titled “Meta fires staff for buying toothpaste, not lunch” reaffirms that staff were not fired for simply using their meal credits, as the title of MSN’s piece led you to believe, but for not using their credits accordingly. All three articles referenced are basically the same. They all say that “Meta staff are given $25 for lunch, $20 for breakfast, and $25 for dinner in vouchers which are meant to be used for ordering food from Grubhub (and/ or Uber Eats” but that those credits were instead used “to buy toothpaste and washing powder (etc.)”. While the original claim from MSN is true, it’s misleading in its title. It’s written to seem like Meta employees were fired for using credits, but the truth is that employees were using those credits to buy items that weren’t food therefore causing them to lose their jobs.