Jordan Robinson

Social media has made information easier to access than ever. At the same time, it has made spreading false information just as easy. A video, picture, or post can reach thousands of people before anyone checks whether it’s true.

Instagram and TikTok are two platforms where this can become a major problem. Both rely heavily on pictures and short videos, and both recommend content based on what users interact with. Because of this, misleading information can spread quickly.

Both platforms have created different policies and tools to address misinformation. After looking into their current efforts, I found that they have made progress, but there are still areas where they could improve.

Instagram and Community Notes

Instagram is owned by Meta, which also owns Facebook and Threads. For years, Meta relied heavily on independent fact-checking organizations to identify false or misleading information.

That changed in the United States in 2025 when Meta announced that it would end its third-party fact-checking program and move toward a system called Community Notes.

According to Meta, Community Notes allows users to add context to posts that may be misleading. A note only appears when contributors who normally have different viewpoints agree that the note is helpful. Contributors are also expected to provide a source supporting the information in their note.

You can read more about the system here:

Meta: Testing Begins for Community Notes on Facebook, Instagram and Threads
https://about.fb.com/news/2025/03/testing-begins-community-notes-facebook-instagram-threads/

How Would Community Notes Work?

Imagine someone posts an old picture on Instagram and claims it shows something that happened yesterday.

Instead of Instagram automatically deleting the post, Community Notes contributors could provide additional information explaining when and where the picture was actually taken. People viewing the original post could then see that information and decide whether they still trust the claim.

There is evidence that this type of system can help.

A 2025 study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences examined more than 40,000 posts using Community Notes on X. Researchers found that posts experienced reductions in reposts, likes, replies, and views after a Community Note appeared. The researchers reported a 46.1 percent reduction in additional reposts after notes appeared.

Research study:
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2503413122

The Problem With Community Notes

One of the biggest problems is speed.

The same research found that notes were more effective when they appeared shortly after the original post was created. A misleading Instagram post could already receive thousands of views before contributors agree on a note.

Another issue is that Meta says posts receiving Community Notes are not automatically given a distribution penalty. That means a misleading post could continue spreading even after additional context has been added.

I think Instagram could improve this system by combining Community Notes with stronger actions when there is clear evidence that something is false.

For example, if a post is spreading extremely quickly while being reviewed, Instagram could temporarily reduce how often it appears in recommendations. This would give reviewers time to examine the claim without automatically deleting the content.

TikTok’s Approach to Misinformation

TikTok takes a somewhat different approach.

The platform uses several methods to address misinformation, including removing content that violates its policies, working with fact-checking organizations, labeling certain content, limiting recommendations, and promoting media literacy.

TikTok has also increased its focus on AI-generated content.

This is becoming more important because AI can create realistic videos, pictures, and audio of events that never happened.

TikTok reported that during the first half of 2025, creator-labeled AI videos increased by 36 percent to more than 8.7 million. Automatically labeled AI-generated content increased by 81 percent to around 5.5 million.

TikTok also reported that videos reviewed by fact-checkers more than doubled to approximately 13,000 during that period.

You can read TikTok’s transparency information here:

TikTok Disinformation Transparency Report
https://newsroom.tiktok.com/tiktok-sixth-disinformation-code-transparency-report?lang=en-150

TikTok Also Relies on Automation

With millions of posts uploaded to TikTok, reviewing everything manually would be extremely difficult.

TikTok therefore relies heavily on automated moderation.

In its August 2026 Digital Services Act transparency report, TikTok reported removing about 104 million pieces of content in the European Union during the first half of 2026 for violations of its policies.

TikTok reported that automated systems handled 94.1 percent of violating content without human review.

It is important to point out that these numbers include multiple types of policy violations. They do not mean that TikTok removed 104 million pieces of misinformation.

TikTok’s report can be found here:

TikTok Digital Services Act Transparency Report
https://newsroom.tiktok.com/digital-services-act-our-seventh-transparency-report-on-content-moderation-in-europe?lang=en-150

Does TikTok’s Approach Work?

I think TikTok has some useful strategies.

Labeling AI-generated content is especially important because AI content is becoming harder to recognize. Fact-checking and limiting recommendations can also prevent questionable information from reaching as many people.

TikTok has also invested in media literacy. The company reported running 14 media literacy and critical-thinking campaigns across Europe during the second half of 2025.

However, TikTok still faces the same major problem as Instagram.

False information can spread faster than people can verify it.

Short videos make this even more difficult because someone can take a real video out of context, add misleading text, or confidently make a claim without providing any evidence.

How TikTok Could Improve

One improvement I would make is giving users easier access to sources.

If a video contains a factual claim that has been reviewed, TikTok could place reliable information directly next to the video.

TikTok could also add another step before someone reposts questionable information. For example, users could receive a message saying that a claim has not been verified and be given the option to view additional information before reposting it.

The person could still decide whether to share it, but they would have more information before doing so.

Can Social Media Platforms Actually Stop Misinformation?

After researching Instagram and TikTok, I do not think one feature can completely solve misinformation.

Removing every questionable post would create its own problems because some claims are uncertain or still developing. However, leaving everything online and expecting users to determine what is true is not enough either.

The best approach appears to involve several strategies.

Platforms can remove content that clearly violates their policies, provide context for questionable claims, identify AI-generated content, reduce recommendations of harmful misinformation, work with outside experts, and teach users how to evaluate information.

Instagram’s Community Notes system focuses more heavily on users providing context. Research on the similar system used by X suggests that Community Notes can reduce engagement with misleading posts once the notes appear.

TikTok takes a broader approach by combining moderation, fact-checking, AI labels, automated systems, and media literacy efforts.

Both platforms still face the same challenge: speed.

A false claim can reach thousands or millions of people before a correction ever appears.

For both Instagram and TikTok, I think speed and transparency should be priorities moving forward. Users should know why something received a warning, what evidence supports the correction, and where that evidence came from.

Social media companies probably cannot eliminate misinformation completely. They can, however, make it more difficult for false information to spread without context and give users better tools to decide what information they should trust.