1Cademy - Community-Based Fact-Checking on Twitters Birdwatch Platform

Concept

Community-Based Fact-Checking on Twitter's Birdwatch Platform - Birdwatch Note Analysis

87.96% of Birdwatch notes were written for misleading tweets and only 12.04% were for non-misleading tweets
Misleading tweets are also a little more likely to include trustworthy sources (63.96%) than non-misleading tweets (62.92%)
Misleading tweets reported due to factual mistakes (30%), missing contexts (28%), unverified facts (25%), outdated information (5.35%), satire (5%), manipulated information and media (3%), or other (3%)
Not misleading tweets reported for containing factual information (62%), personal opinion (16%), or satire (12%)
Notes for misleading tweets tend to contain longer explanations and less complexity with the use of negative sentiments

0

1

Updated 2021-06-10

Contributors are:

Who are from:

References