Search for: All records

Health-related misinformation online poses threats to individual well-being and undermines public health efforts. In response, many social media platforms have temporarily or permanently suspended accounts that spread misinformation, at the risk of losing traffic vital to platform revenue. Here we examine the impact on platform engagement following removal of six prominent accounts during the COVID-19 pandemic. Focused on those who engaged with the removed accounts, we find that suspension did not meaningfully reduce activity on the platform. Moreover, we find that removal of the prominent accounts minimally impacted the diversity of information sources consumed. 

Abstract Misinformation online poses a range of threats, from subverting democratic processes to undermining public health measures. Proposed solutions range from encouraging more selective sharing by individuals to removing false content and accounts that create or promote it. Here we provide a framework to evaluate interventions aimed at reducing viral misinformation online both in isolation and when used in combination. We begin by deriving a generative model of viral misinformation spread, inspired by research on infectious disease. By applying this model to a large corpus (10.5 million tweets) of misinformation events that occurred during the 2020 US election, we reveal that commonly proposed interventions are unlikely to be effective in isolation. However, our framework demonstrates that a combined approach can achieve a substantial reduction in the prevalence of misinformation. Our results highlight a practical path forward as misinformation online continues to threaten vaccination efforts, equity and democratic processes around the globe.