Significant attention has been devoted to determining the credibility of online misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic on social media . Here, we compare the credibility of tweets about COVID-19  to datasets pertaining to other health issues. We find that the quantity of information about COVID-19 is indeed overwhelming, but that the majority of links shared cannot be rated for its credibility. Reasons for this failure to rate include widespread use of social media and news aggregators. The majority of links that could be rated came from credible sources; however, we found a large increase in the proportion of state-sponsored propaganda among non-credible and less credible URLs, suggesting that COVID-19 may be used as a vector to spread misinformation and disinformation for political purposes. Overall, results indicate that COVID-19 is unfolding in a highly uncertain information environment that not may amenable to fact-checking as scientific understanding of the disease, and appropriate public health measures, evolve. As a consequence, public service announcements must adequately communicate the uncertainly underlying these recommendations, while still encouraging healthy behaviors .
Several high-profile sources have focused worldwide attention on the dangers of misinformation about COVID, with the World Health Organization declaring a COVID-19 social media ``infodemic''. Prior work has associated such misinformation with low-credibility sources that are known to spread conspiracy theories and malicious content.5,6 Here, we report the results of an analysis of over 500 million social media posts from Twitter and Facebook between March 8 and May 1, 2020. We find that messages about COVID-19 are more likely to come from high quality sources, with clearer provenance, when compared to other health topics. Low-credibility sources were less likely to post about COVID-19 , with the important exception of state-sponsored propaganda outlets on Twitter. Finally, a known conspiracy theory was more likely to be ``laundered'' through social media platforms than low-credibility news sources. In contrast, misinformation reflecting legitimate scientific uncertainty was primarily discussed by credible news sources. These results suggest that the social media discourse reflects an attempt to come to grips with deep scientific uncertainty during an emerging pandemic, with significant content emanating from unrated; not low credibility, sources. When low-quality content is generated by these unrated sources, they may be amplified by high-credibility sources inadvertently lending them credibility .
R
Significant attention has been devoted to determining the credibility of online misinformation about the
Several high-profile sources have focused worldwide attention on the dangers of misinformation about COVID, with the World Health Organization declaring a
R
pandemic on social media .
social media ``infodemic''. Prior work has associated such misinformation with low-credibility sources that are known to spread conspiracy theories and malicious content.5,6
R
compare the credibility of tweets
report the results of an analysis of over 500 million social media posts from Twitter and Facebook between March 8 and May 1, 2020. We find that messages
A
are more likely to come from high quality sources, with clearer provenance, when compared
D
datasets pertaining to
R
issues. We find that the quantity of information
topics. Low-credibility sources were less likely to post
R
is indeed overwhelming, but that the majority of links shared cannot be rated for its credibility. Reasons for this failure to rate include widespread use of social media and news aggregators. The majority of links that could be rated came from credible sources; however, we found a large increase in the proportion of
, with the important exception of
R
propaganda among non-credible and less credible URLs, suggesting that COVID-19 may be used as a vector to spread misinformation and disinformation for political purposes. Overall, results indicate that COVID-19 is unfolding in a highly uncertain information environment that not may amenable to fact-checking as scientific understanding of the disease, and appropriate public health measures, evolve. As a consequence, public service announcements must adequately communicate the uncertainly underlying these recommendations, while still encouraging healthy behaviors
propaganda outlets on Twitter. Finally, a known conspiracy theory was more likely to be ``laundered'' through social media platforms than low-credibility news sources. In contrast, misinformation reflecting legitimate scientific uncertainty was primarily discussed by credible news sources. These results suggest that the social media discourse reflects an attempt to come to grips with deep scientific uncertainty during an emerging pandemic, with significant content emanating from unrated; not low credibility, sources. When low-quality content is generated by these unrated sources, they may be amplified by high-credibility sources inadvertently lending them credibility