Elizabeth Stewart
How does crowd-sourced fact-checking differ from professional fact-checking? In this qualitative analysis of Community Notes and corresponding posts from X (formerly Twitter), we identify the kinds of claims that note-writers address, the problems that they identify with those claims, the justifications for the verdicts they reach, and the sources they draw on to support these claims. Additionally, we compare these epistemic practices with that of professional fact-checkers. We find that, in contrast to professional fact-checkers, note writers address a wide range of factual and non-factual claims and identify both epistemic and non-epistemic problems with these claims. These findings show that crowd-sourced fact-checking blurs the line between fact-checking and broader platform moderation. Furthermore, note writers actively moderate each other’s conduct, thereby shaping the limits and aims of the Community Notes project.