Major digital platforms have long resisted fact-checking their users, even as public concern about misinformation has grown. We explore how they legitimated a change in this policy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using blog posts by Meta, YouTube and Twitter, the study contributes to the body of research on content moderation by US-based platforms as they expand their policies into contested areas. Based on the theories of discursive legitimation, we examine the strategies platforms employ when presenting their actions in countering false and misleading health information. We show that the pandemic emerges as an important opportunity for platforms to narrate their legitimacy in society. Yet, the newly adopted responsibility to curb health misinformation does not signal a reform towards more truthful platforms, but temporary exceptions whose future is left open. These findings foreshadow the reversals of misinformation policies in recent years and highlight the continued importance of external regulation.
Heikkilä et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: