Report March 2025
Science Feedback is a publication verifying the credibility of influential information and media coverage that claims to be scientific in fields that are particularly prone to misunderstandings and misinformation such as climate change and health. It is operated by a not-for-profit organization.
Empowering Researchers
Commitment 26
Relevant Signatories commit to provide access, wherever safe and practicable, to continuous, real-time or near real-time, searchable stable access to non-personal data and anonymised, aggregated, or manifestly-made public data for research purposes on Disinformation through automated means such as APIs or other open and accessible technical solutions allowing the analysis of said data.
We signed up to the following measures of this commitment
Measure 26.1
In line with this commitment, did you deploy new implementation measures (e.g. changes to your terms of service, new tools, new policies, etc)?
If yes, list these implementation measures here
Do you plan to put further implementation measures in place in the next 6 months to substantially improve the maturity of the implementation of this commitment?
If yes, which further implementation measures do you plan to put in place in the next 6 months?
Measure 26.1
Relevant Signatories will provide public access to non-personal data and anonymised, aggregated or manifestly-made public data pertinent to undertaking research on Disinformation on their services, such as engagement and impressions (views) of content hosted by their services, with reasonable safeguards to address risks of abuse (e.g. API policies prohibiting malicious or commercial uses).
QRE 26.1.1
Relevant Signatories will describe the tools and processes in place to provide public access to non-personal data and anonymised, aggregated and manifestly-made public data pertinent to undertaking research on Disinformation, as well as the safeguards in place to address risks of abuse.
Transparency Centre
Commitment 36
Signatories commit to updating the relevant information contained in the Transparency Centre in a timely and complete manner.
We signed up to the following measures of this commitment
Measure 36.1 Measure 36.2 Measure 36.3
In line with this commitment, did you deploy new implementation measures (e.g. changes to your terms of service, new tools, new policies, etc)?
If yes, list these implementation measures here
Do you plan to put further implementation measures in place in the next 6 months to substantially improve the maturity of the implementation of this commitment?
If yes, which further implementation measures do you plan to put in place in the next 6 months?
Measure 36.3
Signatories will update the Transparency Centre to reflect the latest decisions of the Permanent Task-force, regarding the Code and the monitoring framework.
SLI 36.1.1
Signatories will provide meaningful quantitative information on the usage of the Transparency Centre, such as the average monthly visits of the webpage.
| Country | |
|---|---|
| Total page views | 20255 |
| Report downloads | 5626 |
| Average session engagement time | 4mn 5 secs |
Crisis and Elections Response
Elections 2024
[Note: Signatories are requested to provide information relevant to their particular response to the threats and challenges they observed on their service(s). They ensure that the information below provides an accurate and complete report of their relevant actions. As operational responses to crisis/election situations can vary from service to service, an absence of information should not be considered a priori a shortfall in the way a particular service has responded. Impact metrics are accurate to the best of signatories’ abilities to measure them].
Threats observed or anticipated
_______________________
Overall, Science Feedback did not detect any extremely acute disinformation event specifically related to the EP elections.However, the European elections saw an exacerbation of preexisting disinformation trends. Disinformation was either directly related to the EU (e.g. misrepresenting the functioning of EU institutions, specific policies proposed or voted at the EU level, misrepresentation of the competencies devolved to the EU) or simply used the elections to feed preexisting narratives that had at best an indirect relationship with the election at hand (e.g. narratives around law and order, birth rates, the Israel-Gaza conflict, developments around the war in Ukraine…).In Science Feedback’s view, the EP elections served mostly as a focal point for an acceleration of preexisting disinformation phenomena. As such, time-bound responses such as the Rapid Response System are an extremely useful complement to, but cannot be a substitute for, strengthened sustained action to tackle disinformation.
_______________________
French snap elections
_______________________
As for the European elections, the main disinformation events (including FIMI) were largely an acceleration of preexisting narratives.
Mitigations in place
_______________________
Science Feedback increased the resources dedicated to general monitoring of online platforms for short-term disinformation events, by dedicating one full-time staff member to online patrols, tasked with identifying issues and developments that would fall within the scope of the RRS.
_______________________
French snap elections
_______________________
Science Feedback increased the resources dedicated to general monitoring of online platforms for short-term disinformation events, by dedicating one full-time staff member to online patrols, tasked with identifying issues and developments that would fall within the scope of the RRS.