The idea behind Twitter’s Community Notes seems noble: empower users to collaboratively add context to misleading posts. The process is transparent, with the algorithm open-source and data available on GitHub. Contributors can leave notes on any post, and if enough contributors from different viewpoints deem the note helpful, it becomes publicly visible. Twitter maintains that these notes do not reflect its viewpoint and cannot be edited by its teams, unless they violate Twitter’s rules.
However, the reality appears far murkier. Chris Little Woo, a Community Notes contributor, highlights significant issues. He alleges that the system is being manipulated to silence dissenting voices, particularly those questioning government policies, big pharmaceutical companies, and other powerful entities. One user, “Enterprising Desert Raven,” has posted nearly 5,000 Community Notes since March 2023, averaging over 70 notes per day. This volume raises suspicions that the account is not operated by an individual but rather a bot, a group of activists, or even intelligence agencies.
Little Woo points out the recurring themes in Desert Raven’s notes: they often defend vaccines, big pharma, and current government regimes while targeting accounts critical of these subjects. The notes are backed by a consistent group of contributors, suggesting coordinated efforts. This manipulation undermines the credibility of the Community Notes system, making it a tool for propaganda rather than a source of unbiased information.
The issue extends beyond Twitter. Wikipedia, for example, is also susceptible to manipulation. Pages on controversial topics, such as foreign policy, COVID-19, and vaccines, are often edited by individuals with vested interests, including intelligence agencies. This results in biased information that supports establishment narratives.
The manipulation of these platforms underscores a broader problem: the difficulty of maintaining truly democratic and transparent systems in the face of powerful interests. While the idea of Community Notes and Wikipedia as platforms for collective truth-seeking is appealing, their execution falls short, compromised by those who seek to control the narrative.
In conclusion, while platforms like Twitter and Wikipedia aim to democratise information, they are not immune to manipulation by powerful entities. Users should remain vigilant and critical of the information presented, recognising that even well-intentioned systems can be corrupted.