Twitter debuts Birdwatch, in testing since last year, which lets select users flag and add notes about tweets they think are misleading or false

Twitter unveiled a feature Monday meant to bolster its efforts to combat misinformation and disinformation by tapping users in a fashion similar …

NBC News 2021-01-26

Context & Ripple Effects

Birdwatch follows Twitter’s earlier test of user-attached notes for misleading tweets, moving the company from an exploratory tool toward a selected-user program. It makes misinformation handling partly a product workflow rather than solely a centralized enforcement decision.

The subsequent coverage traces a deliberate expansion path: notes first reached pilot participants across Twitter’s apps, then a randomized U.S. audience, before becoming visible to all U.S. users. That progression makes the initial limited launch the foundation for a broader crowdsourced moderation system.

First-order effects

Selected Birdwatch participants can flag tweets and supply explanatory notes, giving Twitter a new stream of user-generated misinformation assessments.
Twitter gains a controlled environment to evaluate whether participant notes can be surfaced beyond the initial group without immediately exposing the feature to its full audience.

Second-order effects

The pilot creates pressure for Twitter’s existing moderation process to incorporate community judgments alongside company-led labels or enforcement decisions.
As later pilot access across iOS, Android, and desktop shows, the usefulness of Birdwatch depends on building participation and consistency across the platforms where tweets are consumed.

Third-order effects

The later move to make crowdsourced notes visible to all U.S. users points to moderation becoming a layered system in which users add public context rather than Twitter alone determining every disputed claim.
If that rollout model holds, the key structural question shifts from whether platforms solicit user input to how they select contributors and decide which community notes receive broad visibility.

The trend: Twitter is moving toward crowdsourced contextual moderation, scaling from a limited fact-checking pilot to wider visibility for community-authored notes.

Discussion

Twitter Keith Coleman on x
Introducing Birdwatch, a community-based approach to misinformation
@twittersupport @twittersupport on x
🐦 Today we're introducing @Birdwatch, a community-driven approach to addressing misleading information. And we want your help. (1/3) https://twitter.com/...
@wongmjane Jane Manchun Wong on x
Twitter might publish Birdwatch data (their misinfo combatting tool) daily so the “community” (public?) get to analyze the data, on whether people think a tweet is misinfo The files are formatted as TSV, w/ the structure as follows (tried my best to represent it in TypeScript) ht…
@twittersupport @twittersupport on x
We're looking for people to test this out in the US — you can add notes with helpful context to Tweets that you think are misleading. For now, these notes won't appear directly on Twitter, but anyone in the US can view them at: https://birdwatch.twitter.com/ (2/3)
@twittersupport @twittersupport on x
We'll use the notes and your feedback to help shape this program and learn how to reach our goal of letting the Twitter community decide when and what context is added to a Tweet. For details and how to apply to be a part of Birdwatch: https://blog.twitter.com/... (3/3)
@cassandrarules Cassandra Fairbanks on x
They're literally copying Parler's moderation. That platform that you guys drove off the Internet. https://twitter.com/...
@saliltripathi @saliltripathi on x
Good luck to @twitter. Fact-checking is important, but if it is crowd-sourced, there's always the risk of the more organised, more-passionate, more-patient, and more-persistent folks trying to have the last word and game the system to make facts resemble their preconceptions. htt…
@sharylattkisson @sharylattkisson on x
No. Let the information be there unless it's illegal. Any effort to appoint 3d parties to police information is co-opted by organized corporate/political interests who interpret “misinformation” in any way that benefits their cause. https://twitter.com/...
@nbcnews @nbcnews on x
Twitter unveils “Birdwatch” feature meant to bolster its efforts to combat misinformation and disinformation by tapping users in a fashion similar to Wikipedia to flag potentially misleading tweets. https://www.nbcnews.com/...
@imani_barbarin @imani_barbarin on x
Here's how this is going to go: Black people: white supremacy is a problem... Birdwatch: Tweet subject to interpretation. https://twitter.com/...
@tressiemcphd Tressie McMillan Cottom on x
If you know me, you know I hate this. https://twitter.com/...
@mtracey Michael Tracey on x
These fancy new “approaches” to addressing “misinformation” always skip over the solution which is ultimately the only tenable one: encourage people to develop critical thinking skills on their own, instead of treating them like easily manipulated babies https://twitter.com/...
@sameer_singh17 Sameer Singh on x
Interesting twist on community curation and a much more scalable way to address this than manual curation (moderation). Wonder if other networks will replicate this. https://twitter.com/...
@jess Jessica Verrilli on x
Content moderation and misinformation are obviously huge challenges inherent to UGC platforms. We're in the early innings of seeing new models emerge to address this. @Birdwatch (below) is a new approach from Twitter. And @Facebook's Oversight Board is another. https://twitter.co…
@thisislaurat Laura on x
Who's gonna fact check the fact checkers? Because according to them race is just a social construct, diversity is our strength and demographic replacement is a conspiracy theory (depending on who says it). https://twitter.com/...
@eoinhiggins_ Eoin Higgins on x
Oh yeah that's definitely what I'm going to use it for https://twitter.com/...
@nathanblawrence Nathan Lawrence on x
Wikipedia is a nonprofit, public repository of knowledge. Meanwhile, Twitter is a big corporation, asking you to work for it for free. https://twitter.com/...
@pogue David Pogue on x
Twitter's new effort to combat misinformation through crowdsourcing is called Birdwatch. The company acknowledges that it's a tall order— “this might be messy”—but believes that “this is a model worth trying.” Seconded! https://www.nbcnews.com/...
@mariannaspring Marianna Spring on x
A move welcomed by those worried about the spread of harmful disinformation on social media. But fears for abuse directed at these birdwatchers - and is fact-checking alone enough? From reporting on this beat, understanding who spreads disinfo and who it impacts also crucial. htt…
@b52malmet Barbara Malmet on x
Twitter's attempt to combat disinformation is a new feature in the drop down menu. #Birdwatch https://www.nbcnews.com/...
@911corlebra777 Pete Evans on x
This will be a disaster. Dosn't Twitter remember 2019, when thousands of accts linked to China spoofed the reporting algorithms & got 15K legit accounts banned? It was one of the rare cases where Twitter reversed the bans after an outcry #Birdshite cc @thespybrief @JamesFourM htt…
@sethcotlar Seth Cotlar on x
This is an interesting experiment. Here's hoping it makes some sort of difference and isn't just swamped by bad faith trolls. https://twitter.com/...
@samharrelson Sam Harrelson on x
This is getting mixed reviews, mainly because people are just reading the headlines. In reality, this could be a really interesting (and useful) tool if it's anything like Reddit's user trust system and there is transparency built into the system (and data releases). Good move. h…
@wongmjane Jane Manchun Wong on x
The idea of Birdwatch sounds interesting. It's a step to decentralize their operation — instead of having Twitter decide whether a tweet is “truth”, the community decides on it collectively It's also a bet that users will act in good faith and not abuse https://blog.twitter.com/.…
@lydiaburrell @lydiaburrell on x
attn birdwatchers, the birdwatch account says joined october 2020 but has balloons today. very suspicious, reeks of disinfo https://twitter.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@jonah Jonah Grant on x
Hi! Today we're announcing Birdwatch. It's the start of an experiment in community-based misinformation labeling and additive context on Twitter https://blog.twitter.com/...
@b_fung Brian Fung on x
Twitter is about to become a little more like reddit and Wikipedia, turning to users to add context to misleading tweets in a new pilot project known as Birdwatch: https://blog.twitter.com/...
@tiffanycli Tiffany C. Li on x
I have MANY concerns with Birdwatch. Unlike Wikipedia, Twitter is not one cohesive community, and users are not dedicated to a common purpose of sharing knowledge. Imagine the harassment and disinfo you already see in replies and QTs, but transposed to a “fact check” context! htt…
@jeffveillette Jeff Veillette on x
Crowd sourced and the barrier to entry is just phone and email verification? This is a disaster awaiting to happen - just going to be a race to see which clique can disarm their enemies the fastest, in every niche. https://twitter.com/...
@larakate Lara Cohen on x
misinformation is the number one problem platforms like ours need to tackle. launching a thoughtful experiment today and doing a ton of thinking in this space. https://twitter.com/...
@kayvz Kayvon Beykpour on x
I'm very excited about the potential for decentralized moderation on Twitter, as a means to increase scale, speed and trust around important problems like Misleading Info. @Birdwatch is our first start— a community-driven approach to addressing misleading information. More 👇🏻 htt…
@peterjhasson Peter J. Hasson on x
Twitter is piloting a new program allowing users to add notes to tweets they believe are misleading — including tweets from media outlets https://www.foxnews.com/...
@oneunderscore__ Ben Collins on x
Pretty much anybody can apply to be part of the trial for Twitter's new Birdwatch community, which they hope to roll out to more users if it works. It won't just be fact-checkers and high-profile accounts, but you need to use a real email address. https://www.nbcnews.com/...
@oneunderscore__ Ben Collins on x
Birdwatch will, at first, be a separate place where users can discuss tweets that might contain disinfo on the platform. The results will be cordoned off from Twitter to start, but that may change down the line. https://www.nbcnews.com/...
@oneunderscore__ Ben Collins on x
Twitter's new user-generated fact-checking portal, Birdwatch, is a pretty substantial step for the company. Its creators spent a lot of time trying to stop it from becoming weapon in the information war, which we outline in this story. Will it work? https://www.nbcnews.com/...
@brandyzadrozny Brandy Zadrozny on x
The site is basically a shell at the moment. You can sign up here. https://twitter.com/...
@oneunderscore__ Ben Collins on x
NEW from me + @brandyzadrozny: Twitter is launching a crowd-sourced fact-checking feature called Birdwatch. It's their new effort to fight disinformation on the platform, and it feels a lot like Reddit and Wikipedia. https://www.nbcnews.com/...
@caseynewton Casey Newton on x
Idea: @birdwatch, but for tweets that are just really bad
@ow @ow on x
I've always been confused why Twitter doesn't have a way to report misleading tweets, and Birdwatch seems like a good start at dealing with that https://blog.twitter.com/...
@ow @ow on x
But of course apparently moderation is.....a US only problem? 🙄 https://twitter.com/...
@chrismessina Chris Messina on x
Fascinated by how fast social platforms are adopting a jury-by-peer model of adjudication to fight the reach of mis- and disinformation. This trend seems to be taking over faster than stories proliferated! ⚡ See also: @OversightBoard, Parler /cc @mmasnick #Section230 https://twit…
@mmasnick Mike Masnick on x
Oh wow. This is potentially huge and important (ht: @chrismessina). https://twitter.com/...

Chronicles