The importance of centering harm in data infrastructures for ‘soft moderation’: X’s Community Notes as a case study

This article critically examines the social implications of data infrastructures designed to moderate contested content categories such as disinformation. It does so in the context of new online safety regulation (e.g. the EU Digital Services Act) that pushes digital platforms to improve how they tackle both illegal and ‘legal but harmful’ content. In particular, we investigate and conceptualise X’s Community Notes, a tool that uses ‘human-AI cooperation’ to add context to tweets, as a data infrastructure for ‘soft moderation’. We find that Community Notes is limited when dealing with under-acknowledged online harms, such as those derived from the intersection between disinformation and humour. While research points to the potential of content moderation solutions that combine automation with humans-in-the-loop, we show how this approach can fail when disinformation is poorly defined in policy and practice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
New Media & Society
Published
2025-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448251314399
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
9.46
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The importance of centering harm in data infrastructures for ‘soft moderation’: X’s Community Notes as a case study

Nadia Jude, Ariadna Matamoros-Fernández
4 citations
New Media & Society
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
9.46
article

The importance of centering harm in data infrastructures for ‘soft moderation’: X’s Community Notes as a case study

Nadia Jude, Ariadna Matamoros-Fernández
article en
4 citations

Abstract

This article critically examines the social implications of data infrastructures designed to moderate contested content categories such as disinformation. It does so in the context of new online safety regulation (e.g. the EU Digital Services Act) that pushes digital platforms to improve how they tackle both illegal and ‘legal but harmful’ content. In particular, we investigate and conceptualise X’s Community Notes, a tool that uses ‘human-AI cooperation’ to add context to tweets, as a data infrastructure for ‘soft moderation’. We find that Community Notes is limited when dealing with under-acknowledged online harms, such as those derived from the intersection between disinformation and humour. While research points to the potential of content moderation solutions that combine automation with humans-in-the-loop, we show how this approach can fail when disinformation is poorly defined in policy and practice.

New Media & SocietyVol. 27(4)
Queensland University of Technology (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
9.46
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

The importance of centering harm in data infrastructures for ‘soft moderation’: X’s Community Notes as a case study — Nadia Jude, Ariadna Matamoros-Fernández · New Media & Society (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS