Analysis: Fact checkers accelerate Community Notes on X

Community notes with references to fact checkers are displayed slightly more frequently and faster on the social network X than other comments on posts. This is the conclusion of an analysis by the Spanish fact-checking organization "Fundación Maldita.es", which evaluated data on almost 1.2 million community notes submitted in 2024. According to the analysis, only 8.3 percent of these were published.

According to Maldita.es, the rate for community notes with links from fact checkers is slightly better at 12%. This figure rises to 15 percent if only links from European organizations are considered. According to the analysis, fact-checkers are organizations recognized by the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN) or the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN). These include fact-checkers such as Maldita or Correctiv, but also news agencies such as AFP or APA.

Wikipedia for fact-checking

According to Maldita.es, links from fact-checkers are the third most cited source in the community notes. X itself and Wikipedia are cited much more frequently as the source for the corrections. Community Notes with a link to a fact-checking organization are reportedly displayed on average 90 minutes earlier than other submissions. This is said to be because users mark them as useful more quickly after the original article has been published.

Maldita sees this as a positive development, but at the same time criticizes the fact that X does not publish the vast majority of submitted community notes. In this context, the organization points out that X's algorithm gives more weight to community notes if users from different political camps can agree that a community note is helpful. As a result, factually correct comments could also be delayed or not published at all. This is based on an analysis of the algorithm by researcher Nicolas Kees from 2024.

In almost all languages in which data was analysed, large and trustworthy news organizations are among the most cited sources. Wikipedia, the largest collection of knowledge on the internet, also plays a crucial role. In German-language comments in particular, where Wikipedia is ahead of X in this statistic, the portal appears to be very popular as a source. In the German language, the Tagesschau is in third place as a frequently cited source. In addition to YouTube, the top ten in German-language community notes also include Der Spiegel, Die Welt, Die Zeit and ZDF.

Other platforms are planning similar measures

For the results cited, the Spanish organization evaluated data from all publicly accessible community notes in 2024. The data set consisted of 1,175,837 community notes and was publicly available for download.

Maldita criticizes the fact that other platforms such as YouTube and Meta, which have similar programs in the pipeline, are adopting X's practice. Instead, they should continue to work with fact-checkers. The organization is also calling for tougher penalties for spreading false information and for platforms not to delete corrections due to external pressure.

(tlz)