Community notes have emerged as a key strategy implemented by Elon Musk to tackle misinformation following his acquisition of Twitter in 2022. Musk asserted, “They are the best source of truth on the internet.” While this may hold true for certain topics, their effectiveness diminishes significantly in political discussions.
According to Pedro Ramaciotti, Director of the AI Chair in Social Sciences and Humanities at the French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS), “The system moderates comparatively less polarizing content because it generates less consensus between people of different orientations.” Ramaciotti, co-author of a recent article in Science Advances, highlights the challenges inherent in this model: “Scientific evidence has shown that people tend not to recognize as false content that reinforces their political positions, even if it objectively contains inaccuracies.” Initially a promising concept, the community notes system faced scrutiny when Musk encountered corrections on his own tweets.
How Community Notes Work
The community notes system operates by allowing users to propose corrections to tweets that raise questions, linking to purportedly accurate sources. Other users then vote on the credibility of these corrections. Only if the correction receives support from users across the ideological spectrum does X make the community note publicly visible. However, the algorithm classifies users based on ideology to identify consensus. When a politically charged message is involved, it often leads to polarization, resulting in the survival of political misinformation as no agreement is reached for correction.
Research analyzing 1.9 million community notes, which gathered 135 million ratings until March 2025, indicates that only 12% of proposed corrections gain the necessary support from diverse ideological groups to become visible. Remarkably, 85% of these notes remain unpublished due to the lack of diverse evaluations.
Legal Implications in Europe
The failure to effectively manage misinformation can lead to legal repercussions, especially within the European Union. Ramaciotti states, “To operate in the European Union, a platform must evaluate and mitigate the risks that its services may generate for electoral processes.” He warns that if community ratings struggle with election-related content, platforms may not fulfill obligations outlined in European regulations.
X is not alone in adopting this system. In January 2025, Mark Zuckerberg announced that Meta would shift from traditional fact-checkers to a community notes model akin to X's. In a video statement, Zuckerberg emphasized, “We are going back to our roots and focusing on reducing errors and restoring freedom of expression on our platforms.” The transition is set to commence in the United States.
Challenges and Global Considerations
Another significant issue identified by researchers is the inherent reliance on American ideological frameworks within the community notes system. The left-right political axis, predominantly shaped by U.S. politics, does not translate universally across different countries. Ramaciotti explains, “The community notes algorithm first calculates a single independent ideological dimension of the country and identifies moderation proposals that achieve consensus. However, not all countries exhibit such a simplistic political structure. In Europe, for instance, several countries may embody three or more independent political axes affecting public opinion.”
