Notices by Science Feedback (sciencefeedback@masto.ai)

1/ How effective is X’s Community Notes at addressing misinformation? @sciencefeedback data team investigated moderation during the 2024 EU elections using data from the EFCSN. Here’s what we found:

https://science.feedback.org/despite-community-notes-most-content-reviewed-eu-fact-checkers-goes-unaddressed-x-twitter/

4/ While X promotes Community Notes as a crowd-sourced alternative to professional fact-checking, our findings reveal that its limited reach and uneven application across EU countries undermine its ability to manage misinformation effectively at a scale, especially during critical events like elections.

3/ Out of 894 tweets flagged by professional fact-checkers:
▪︎ 67.2% had no visible moderation.
▪︎ Only 11.3% featured Community Notes or warning labels.
▪︎ 19.5% were deleted.

Community Notes coverage varies dramatically across countries. For example:
▪︎ Denmark: 2.44 Notes per 1,000 users
▪︎ Hungary: 0.08 Notes per 1,000 users

These gaps highlight the system’s uneven implementation.

2/ Community Notes, launched as "Birdwatch" in 2021 and rebranded in 2023, relies on crowd-sourced input. Notes require cross-partisan agreement before publication, but this limits scalability and response to viral misinformation.

5/ Additionally, check out this report we co-authored with 10 other organizations, analyzing a Russian-linked disinformation campaign on X (Twitter) across six countries, including 4 EU members, Ukraine, and the US:
https://science.feedback.org/twitter-x-fails-to-act-on-doppelganger-related-notices/

Just released! 🚀 Science Feedback, together with EFCSN and Newtral, just published "A Fertile Ground for Disinformation”, which uncovers how the 2024 farmers’ protests in Europe were used to spread climate misinformation and anti-EU climate action narratives.