Meta’s controversial switch to a Community Notes model, while phasing out third-party fact-checking, is set to get underway very soon, with the company today posting a new overview of how Community Notes will function, and how users will now be in control of what is and is not flagged as false information across its apps.
Following X’s model, Community Notes in Meta’s apps will enable users to add their own explainers to question the validity of the information being presented in any post across Facebook, Instagram, and Threads. It will not extend to ads (which can be Community Noted on X)
Approved Community Notes contributors will have 500 words to explain their concern with the content, and will also be required to include a reference link for context.
Meta’s even created a new mini-site to explain this approach.
But what Meta hasn’t included in this new overview is an explanation of the key element that renders Community Notes on X largely ineffective as a misinformation-addressing system: That users of conflicting political beliefs will need to agree that a note is necessary before it’s displayed in the app.
As Meta explained in its initial overview of how Community Notes will work:
“Just like they do on X, Community Notes will require agreement between people with a range of perspectives to help prevent biased ratings.”
The idea being that this will redress any preferential bias by ensuring that there’s agreement between people of opposing ideologies.
But as research on X has shown, that means that a lot of Community Notes never get shown to users as a result, even when they do highlight provable misinformation.
In fact, according to analysis conducted by the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), a whopping 73% of Community Notes related to political topics are never displayed, despite them providing valuable context.
This chart highlights the topics most likely to fail on this front, and it’s no surprise that things like election interference will never reach agreement from people on both sides of the ideological aisle.
And in a time where the President himself is prone to amplifying misleading, and often flat out incorrect information, that could be extremely problematic, essentially eliminating any sort of barrier that might limit the amplification of such claims.
Which, at Facebook’s scale, could be far more problematic than it is on X.
There’s also no definitive explanation as to how Meta will determine a contributor’s political leanings.
On X, contributor perspective is based on how people have rated notes in the past, with the idea being that “contributors who tend to rate the same notes similarly are likely to have more similar perspectives.” X also ascertains political leanings, “by analyzing X’s follow, like, and repost graphs,” and that combined analysis helps X determine your personal, ideological perspective.
Facebook already tracks people’s political leanings (as you’ll find in the “Ad Preferences” section of the “Privacy Center”), so it likely already has some strong indicators on this front, but this is another measure that would provide transparency, and highlight potential flaws in how its Community Notes process will work.
Also worth noting: Community Notes on X has already been infiltrated by organized groups of contributors who collaborate to up and downvote Notes, based on political and/or philosophical alignment.
Even Elon himself has repeatedly admitted that Community Notes is being “gamed by state actors,” with his latest revelation on this front coming this week. “Unfortunately, @CommunityNotes is increasingly being gamed by governments & legacy media. Working to fix this,” Musk shared in a now-deleted post.
Conveniently, Meta has included any of this context in its overview of Community Notes, its great new solution for detecting and limiting misinformation in its apps. Which now reach over 3.3 billion people per month.
Which is more than a third of the world’s population.
But sure, should be fine. Big thumbs up all round. Community Notes FTW.
