TikTok has rolled out a new crowd-sourced fact-checking feature in the United States, joining other major social media platforms in enlisting users to help verify content.
The tool, called Footnotes, allows users to add contextual notes to videos and vote on whether other notes should appear. According to TikTok, these footnotes can include expert perspectives on complex topics or additional data to give audiences a more complete understanding of events.
The approach mirrors similar initiatives on platforms like X (formerly Twitter) and Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, where community-driven notes have been used to counter misinformation. X introduced its version, originally called Birdwatch, in 2021 and continued it after Elon Musk’s takeover. Meta launched its own programme earlier this year.
Experts say the move reflects a broader trend toward moderation models that emphasize free speech while limiting platform intervention. Otavio Vinhas, a researcher at Brazil’s National Institute of Science and Technology, links the shift to political pressures — particularly in the U.S. — to reduce corporate control over online speech.
Supporters of crowd-sourced moderation point to research suggesting that, when evaluating factual accuracy, large groups can often match professional fact-checkers in identifying reliable information. However, Vinhas notes that TikTok’s version is stricter than others, requiring users to cite sources for their notes — something not mandatory on X.
Still, visibility remains a hurdle. Scott Hale, associate professor at the Oxford Internet Institute, said that most notes on all platforms are never seen. This is due in part to algorithms that test whether people with differing viewpoints find the same note helpful before displaying it publicly. A study by the Digital Democracy Institute of the Americas found that over 90% of 1.7 million English and Spanish notes on X never appeared on the platform, with those that did averaging a two-week delay before publication.
Hale warns that echo chambers — where users primarily see content that confirms their beliefs — make it difficult for contradicting notes to gain traction. He suggests “gamifying” contributions, similar to Wikipedia’s reward and recognition systems, to encourage greater participation and visibility.
Crowd-sourced notes are just one tool in social media’s moderation toolkit. Platforms like Meta, X, and TikTok also rely on automated systems to flag potential violations, as well as professional fact-checkers to verify claims, often in real time during political or social crises.
Both Hale and Vinhas agree that professional and community-based fact-checking can complement each other — combining grassroots engagement with the depth of trained investigators. For now, TikTok says Footnotes will contribute to a broader global fact-checking programme, though it has not confirmed long-term plans for expansion.
