Twitter testing labeling ‘fake news’ with bright orange warnings

Twitter is experimenting with adding bright orange warning labels directly beneath what it deems to be “fake news” according to a leaked demo of new features sent to NBC News.

Twitter is testing labeling 'fake news' with bright orange warnings
Twitter is testing labeling ‘fake news’ with bright orange warnings

Ben Collins for NBC News:

Twitter confirmed that the leaked demo, which was accessible on a publicly available site, is one possible iteration of a new policy to target misinformation it plans to roll out March 5.

In this version, disinformation or misleading information posted by public figures will be corrected directly beneath the tweet by fact-checkers and journalists who are verified on the platform, and possibly other users who will participate in a new “community reports” feature, which the demo claims is “like Wikipedia.”

In one iteration of the demo, Twitter users could earn “points” and a “community badge” if they “contribute in good faith and act like a good neighbor” and “provide critical context to help people understand information they see.”

In the demo, community members are asked if the tweet is “likely” or “unlikely” to be “harmfully misleading.” They are then asked to rate how many community members will answer the same as them on a sliding scale of 1 to 100, before elaborating on why the tweet is harmfully misleading.

“The more points you earn, the more your vote counts,” the demo reads.

MacDailyNews Take: Good luck with your can of worms, Twitter.

19 Comments

        1. MDN: still asleep on the forum moderation? The above 2 cowardly attackers, dd and his shadow, deserve no space here to air their misananthropic off-topic ramblings. Why can’t you enforce your own forum rules?

    1. John, you overstepped. It’s not okay to attack a person for physical characteristics that he/she didn’t choose. This comment should be deleted. It doesn’t further the discourse.

      We all know already why twitter chose the color orange.

    1. You do. A real “fact checker” provides all their supporting information and references so you can see exactly how they drew their conclusions. Posters, TV talking heads, and online pundits who never reference their sources are the ones who you should steer away from.

  1. “In the demo, community members are asked if the tweet is “likely” or “unlikely” to be “harmfully misleading.” They are then asked to rate how many community members will answer the same as them on a sliding scale of 1 to 100, before elaborating on why the tweet is harmfully misleading.”

    Oh good, so just like on MDN, libturds will be able to downvote facts that they don’t like. I don’t see how that could go wrong. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

    1. Facts you say?
      Like “Oh good, so just like on MDN, libturds will be able to downvote facts that they don’t like. I don’t see how that could go wrong. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL”….is so full of them?

      Only to a gimlet eyed denier of logic who refuses point blank to realise it works both ways.
      Btw it’s not an asset. So much is true and the votes will reflect that.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.