Thanks to the sheer number of people on Twitter, the platform has become a font of information from experts in their fields who enjoy sharing their knowledge with the public. But because there are always people you've never heard of and accounts without real people behind them, it can be tough to figure out what information is substantiated and what's misguided — or just plain fake.
Like this, for example:
The moon rising in the Artice circle between Russia and Canada pic.twitter.com/S3UX9FYtul
— Lord Sugar (@Lord_Sugar) July 31, 2022
It's good to remember that just because something goes viral, and it seems like a lot of people believe it, doesn't mean it's real or true.
Corey S. Powell, a science writer and journalist, wrote up some tips on identifying false or faulty information on Twitter. Here are his thoughts:
Twitter is full of "wonder science" accounts, many of them full of stolen images & misinformation. The recent viral tweet about the alleged void in space offers a good case study in how to spot the fakes. 1/5 pic.twitter.com/7aamAGK8ai
— Corey S. Powell (@coreyspowell) August 1, 2022
Test #2: What is the source of the information? If there is no source/link (or a generic ID like "NASA"), that's a red flag. It's also a common tactic in bot accounts that scrape or steal images from the actual creators. 3/5 pic.twitter.com/IhLduabcz4
— Corey S. Powell (@coreyspowell) August 1, 2022
Test #4: Common sense is useful even in deep space! If someone is trying seriously to explain a counterintuitive idea, they'll break it down for you. If someone is trying to confuse you, they'll just leave the claim sitting there. 5/5 pic.twitter.com/5hYYeGavgL
— Corey S. Powell (@coreyspowell) August 1, 2022
Bottom line: These anonymous twitter accounts want big lists of followers, and you don't want to be on those lists. Please don't follow, or unfollow. There are many other legit places to get amazing science information.
— Corey S. Powell (@coreyspowell) August 1, 2022
To summarize, here are the red flags Powell says to look out for:
-
No real person or institution identifiable behind the account sending the tweet.
-
No source for the information.
-
Improbable precision in the information presented (for example, a weirdly precise number or measure).
-
Significant or counterintuitive claims that the author of the tweet doesn't take care to explain or unpack.
