In a report published by the nonprofit Center for Countering Digital Hate, it was revealed that X’s fact-checking program, Community Notes, has not been effectively addressing the spread of misinformation related to the U.S. elections on Elon Musk’s social media platform. The analysis found that accurate notes correcting false and misleading claims about the election were not displayed on 74% of misleading posts. This included false claims about the election being stolen and the unreliability of voting systems. Even when Community Notes were displayed, the original misleading posts received significantly more views than the accompanying notes.
Community Notes allows X users to write fact checks on posts after being accepted as contributors to the program. These checks are then rated by other users based on accuracy, sources, readability, and neutrality of language. Originally known as Birdwatch, the program was launched in 2021 by Twitter and renamed by Elon Musk after he took over the site in 2022.
X had previously sued CCDH, blaming the group for a loss of advertising revenue due to an increase in hate speech on the platform. However, the lawsuit was dismissed by a federal judge in March. Keith Coleman, a vice president of product at X overseeing Community Notes, defended the program, stating that it maintains a high standard for accuracy and trust. He highlighted that hundreds of election-related notes have been shown on thousands of posts in 2024 and have been viewed millions of times, attributing their effectiveness to their quality.
Despite X’s claims of effectiveness, CCDH CEO Imran Ahmed criticized Community Notes as merely a “Band Aid on a torrent of hate and disinformation.” He argued that the program does little to address the larger issue of disinformation undermining democracy and creating further division in communities. While X pointed to external academic research supporting the trustworthiness and effectiveness of Community Notes, CCDH’s research suggests otherwise, emphasizing the ongoing challenges posed by misinformation on social media platforms.
In response to the findings, X emphasized the quality of notes being published through the Community Notes program, highlighting the thousands of election-related notes that have met the program’s standards in 2024. The company also pointed to the significant viewership and impact of these notes, suggesting that they are indeed effective in combating misinformation. However, CCDH remains critical of X’s efforts, maintaining that Community Notes are not doing enough to address the broader issues of misinformation and hate speech on the platform.
As the debate over the effectiveness of X’s fact-checking program continues, the issue of misinformation on social media platforms remains a significant concern. With the upcoming U.S. elections and the potential for false information to influence public opinion, the need for accurate and reliable fact-checking mechanisms is more important than ever. It remains to be seen how X will address the critiques of Community Notes and work towards improving its efforts to combat misinformation on the platform.
