Birdwatch, Twitter’s crowdsourced fact-checking experiment, reveals problems

What We’re Reading

We keep an eye out for the most interesting stories about Labby subjects: digital media, startups, the web, journalism, strategy, and more. Here’s some of what we’ve seen lately.

Poynter / Alex Mahadevan / Feb 19, 2021

“A Poynter analysis found that less than half of Birdwatch users include sources and many fact-checking notes contain partisan rhetoric.” —

Tags: Birdwatch, Twitter

What’s the best way to follow how the news is changing?

Our daily email, with all the freshest future-of-journalism news.

Prefer a once-a-week email? »

Cite this article Hide citations

MLA

, . "Birdwatch, Twitter’s crowdsourced fact-checking experiment, reveals problems." Nieman Journalism Lab. Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard, 19 Feb. 2021. Web. 29 Mar. 2025.

APA

, . (2021, Feb. 19). Birdwatch, Twitter’s crowdsourced fact-checking experiment, reveals problems. Nieman Journalism Lab. Retrieved March 29, 2025, from https://www.niemanlab.org/reading/birdwatch-twitters-crowdsourced-fact-checking-experiment-reveals-problems/

Chicago

, . "Birdwatch, Twitter’s crowdsourced fact-checking experiment, reveals problems." Nieman Journalism Lab. Last modified February 19, 2021. Accessed March 29, 2025. https://www.niemanlab.org/reading/birdwatch-twitters-crowdsourced-fact-checking-experiment-reveals-problems/.

Wikipedia

{{cite web
    | url = https://www.niemanlab.org/reading/birdwatch-twitters-crowdsourced-fact-checking-experiment-reveals-problems/
    | title = Birdwatch, Twitter’s crowdsourced fact-checking experiment, reveals problems
    | last =
    | first =
    | work = [[Nieman Journalism Lab]]
    | date = 19 February 2021
    | accessdate = 29 March 2025
    | ref = {{harvid||2021}}
}}

The latest from Nieman Lab