Academic Journal
From professional fact-checkers to the crowd: can Meta's Community Notes survive the Digital Services Act (DSA)?
| Τίτλος: | From professional fact-checkers to the crowd: can Meta's Community Notes survive the Digital Services Act (DSA)? |
|---|---|
| Συγγραφείς: | Papathanasopoulou, Afroditi1 (AUTHOR) afroditi.papathanasopoulou@vub.be |
| Πηγή: | Information & Communications Technology Law. Oct2026, Vol. 35 Issue 3, p298-315. 18p. |
| Θεματικοί όροι: | *Websites, *Digital platforms, *Legal compliance, *Internet content moderation, Fact checking, Disinformation |
| Εταιρία/Οντότητα: | Meta Platforms Inc. , European Union |
| Περίληψη: | As platforms increasingly shape online dialogue, their role in ensuring access to reliable information poses challenges to free speech and media freedom. The spread of disinformation, algorithm-driven content, and declining trust in institutions have forced platforms to adopt moderation tools, often in partnership with professional fact-checkers. Meta's decision to replace fact-checkers with the crowdsourced tool 'Community Notes' raises significant legal and normative concerns under the EU's DSA. This paper critically examines whether Community Notes qualifies as a lawful and effective alternative under Articles 34–35 of the DSA, which require major platforms to assess and mitigate systemic risks through proportionate, risk-specific measures. It compares the transparency and ethical grounding of professional fact-checking with the opacity of crowdsourced moderation. The paper argues that Meta must show how Community Notes fits within its risk assessments, reporting obligations and demonstrate it reduces disinformation without compromising legal safeguards, journalistic standards, or access to credible information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Information & Communications Technology Law is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Βάση Δεδομένων: | Business Source Index |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 CustomLinks: – Url: https://resolver.ebsco.com/c/fiv2js/result?sid=EBSCO:bsx&genre=article&issn=13600834&ISBN=&volume=35&issue=3&date=20261001&spage=298&pages=298-315&title=Information & Communications Technology Law&atitle=From%20professional%20fact-checkers%20to%20the%20crowd%3A%20can%20Meta%27s%20Community%20Notes%20survive%20the%20Digital%20Services%20Act%20%28DSA%29%3F&aulast=Papathanasopoulou%2C%20Afroditi&id=DOI:10.1080/13600834.2025.2570974 Name: Full Text Finder (for New FTF UI) (ns324271) Category: fullText Text: Full Text Finder MouseOverText: Full Text Finder |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: bsx DbLabel: Business Source Index An: 196699812 RelevancyScore: 1435 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 1435 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: From professional fact-checkers to the crowd: can Meta's Community Notes survive the Digital Services Act (DSA)? – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Papathanasopoulou%2C+Afroditi%22">Papathanasopoulou, Afroditi</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> afroditi.papathanasopoulou@vub.be</i> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Information+%26+Communications+Technology+Law%22">Information & Communications Technology Law</searchLink>. Oct2026, Vol. 35 Issue 3, p298-315. 18p. – Name: Subject Label: Subject Terms Group: Su Data: *<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Websites%22">Websites</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Digital+platforms%22">Digital platforms</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Legal+compliance%22">Legal compliance</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Internet+content+moderation%22">Internet content moderation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Fact+checking%22">Fact checking</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Disinformation%22">Disinformation</searchLink> – Name: SubjectCompany Label: Company/Entity Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Meta+Platforms+Inc%2E%22">Meta Platforms Inc.</searchLink> <br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22European+Union%22">European Union</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: As platforms increasingly shape online dialogue, their role in ensuring access to reliable information poses challenges to free speech and media freedom. The spread of disinformation, algorithm-driven content, and declining trust in institutions have forced platforms to adopt moderation tools, often in partnership with professional fact-checkers. Meta's decision to replace fact-checkers with the crowdsourced tool 'Community Notes' raises significant legal and normative concerns under the EU's DSA. This paper critically examines whether Community Notes qualifies as a lawful and effective alternative under Articles 34–35 of the DSA, which require major platforms to assess and mitigate systemic risks through proportionate, risk-specific measures. It compares the transparency and ethical grounding of professional fact-checking with the opacity of crowdsourced moderation. The paper argues that Meta must show how Community Notes fits within its risk assessments, reporting obligations and demonstrate it reduces disinformation without compromising legal safeguards, journalistic standards, or access to credible information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Information & Communications Technology Law is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=bsx&AN=196699812 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1080/13600834.2025.2570974 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 18 StartPage: 298 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Websites Type: general – SubjectFull: Digital platforms Type: general – SubjectFull: Legal compliance Type: general – SubjectFull: Internet content moderation Type: general – SubjectFull: Fact checking Type: general – SubjectFull: Disinformation Type: general – SubjectFull: Meta Platforms Inc. Type: general – SubjectFull: European Union Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: From professional fact-checkers to the crowd: can Meta's Community Notes survive the Digital Services Act (DSA)? Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Papathanasopoulou, Afroditi IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 10 Text: Oct2026 Type: published Y: 2026 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 13600834 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 35 – Type: issue Value: 3 Titles: – TitleFull: Information & Communications Technology Law Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |