On Thursday, Twitter had outlined a plan to combat the spread of election misinformation, reviving previous strategies, but civil and voting rights experts said it would fall short of what was needed to prepare for the upcoming US midterm elections.
The social media company said that it would apply its civic integrity policy, introduced in 2018, to the November 8 midterms, when numerous US Senate and House of Representatives seats will be up for election. The policy relies on labelling or removing posts with misleading content, especially messages intended to stop voting, or claims intended to undermine public confidence in an election.
In a statement, Twitter said that in recent months, it had taken numerous steps to "elevate reliable resources" about primaries and voting processes. Applying a label to a tweet also means that the content is not recommended or distributed to more users.
Twitter is currently engaging in a legal battle with billionaire Elon Musk, over his attempt to walk away from his $44-billion deal to acquire the San Francisco-based company.
Musk has called himself a "free speech absolutist", and has said that Twitter posts should only be removed if they contained illegal content — a view supported by many in the tech industry.
However, civil rights and online misinformation experts have long accused social media and tech platforms of not doing enough to prevent the spread of false content, including the idea that President Joe Biden did not win the 2020 election.
They warn that misinformation could be an even greater challenge this year, as candidates who question the 2020 election are running for office, and a divisive rhetoric is spreading, following an FBI search of former president Donald Trump's Florida home, earlier this week.
"We're seeing the same patterns playing out," said Evan Feeney, deputy senior campaign director at Color of Change, which advocates for the rights of Black Americans.
In the blog post, Twitter said a test of redesigned labels saw a decline in users' retweeting, liking and replying to misleading content.
Researchers say Twitter and other platforms have a spotty record in consistently labeling such content. In a paper published last month, Stanford University researchers examined a sample of posts on Twitter and Meta Platforms' Facebook, that altogether contained 78 misleading claims about the 2020 election. They found that the two social media platforms consistently applied labels to only about 70 per cent of the claims.
Twitter's efforts to fight misinformation during the midterms will include information prompts to debunk falsehoods, before they spread widely online.
More emphasis should be placed on removing false and misleading posts, said Yosef Getachew, media and democracy program director at Common Cause, a non-partisan group.
"Pointing them to other sources isn’t enough," he said.
Experts also questioned Twitter's practice of leaving up some tweets from world leaders, in the name of public interest.
"Twitter has a responsibility and ability to stop misinformation at the source," Feeney added, saying that world leaders and politicians should face a higher standard for what they tweet.
Twitter leads the industry in releasing data on how its efforts to intervene against misinformation are working, said Evelyn Douek, an Assistant Professor at the Stanford Law School, who studies online speech regulation.
Yet, more than a year after soliciting public input on what the company should do when a world leader violates its rules, Twitter has not provided an update, she said.
However, forecasters are still unsure of exactly where it could make landfall
Officials had issued warnings earlier about what they called an unsanctioned car rally separate from the Fall Classic Car Show taking place
The conservationist battled lung illness for several months
According to eye witnesses, 2 groups of teenagers were involved in an altercation and shots were fired
About 500,000 homes left without power across region
The president of the global lender came under fire this week after he declined to say whether he accepted the scientific consensus on global warming