The issue of misinformation on social media platforms like Twitter (now X) and Meta has become pronounced, particularly following leadership changes. The reduction of content moderation teams and partnerships with fact-checkers raises concerns over the spread of false information. David Rand from MIT explains that there's a significant public desire for expert moderation, yet professional fact-checkers struggle to keep pace due to the sheer volume of content. He advocates for crowd-sourced systems to support fact-checking without undermining professional efforts to combat misinformation.
There is broad bipartisan support for reducing the spread of false or misleading information online, and laypeople across the political spectrum think that relying on experts is the most legitimate way to make moderation decisions.
Contrary to recent claims from many political elites, the main problem with professional fact-checking is not bias or overreach; the problem is that professional fact checkers can't keep up with the vast scale of content posted every day.
Crowd-based systems like X's Community Notes can be useful tools to help extend the reach of fact-checking, ideally complementing professional fact checkers rather than replacing them.
The perception of bias in fact-checking often leads to misunderstandings; public sentiment can't overlook the accuracy of information due to a singular focus on perceived bias.
Collection
[
|
...
]