Reluctant arbiters of truth: Discursive legitimation of platform interventions against COVID-19 misinformation

Major digital platforms have long resisted fact-checking their users, even as public concern about misinformation has grown. We explore how they legitimated a change in this policy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using blog posts by Meta, YouTube and Twitter, the study contributes to the body of research on content moderation by US-based platforms as they expand their policies into contested areas. Based on the theories of discursive legitimation, we examine the strategies platforms employ when presenting their actions in countering false and misleading health information. We show that the pandemic emerges as an important opportunity for platforms to narrate their legitimacy in society. Yet, the newly adopted responsibility to curb health misinformation does not signal a reform towards more truthful platforms, but temporary exceptions whose future is left open. These findings foreshadow the reversals of misinformation policies in recent years and highlight the continued importance of external regulation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
New Media & Society
Published
2025-08-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448251365270
Primary Topic
Misinformation and Its Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reluctant arbiters of truth: Discursive legitimation of platform interventions against COVID-19 misinformation

Matti Pohjonen, Salla-Maaria Laaksonen, Tuomas Heikkilä
New Media & Society
Misinformation and Its Impacts
article

Reluctant arbiters of truth: Discursive legitimation of platform interventions against COVID-19 misinformation

Matti Pohjonen, Salla-Maaria Laaksonen, Tuomas Heikkilä
article en

Abstract

Major digital platforms have long resisted fact-checking their users, even as public concern about misinformation has grown. We explore how they legitimated a change in this policy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using blog posts by Meta, YouTube and Twitter, the study contributes to the body of research on content moderation by US-based platforms as they expand their policies into contested areas. Based on the theories of discursive legitimation, we examine the strategies platforms employ when presenting their actions in countering false and misleading health information. We show that the pandemic emerges as an important opportunity for platforms to narrate their legitimacy in society. Yet, the newly adopted responsibility to curb health misinformation does not signal a reform towards more truthful platforms, but temporary exceptions whose future is left open. These findings foreshadow the reversals of misinformation policies in recent years and highlight the continued importance of external regulation.

New Media & Society
University of Helsinki (FI)
Helsingin Sanomain Säätiö, Uudenmaan Rahasto, Kulttuurin ja Yhteiskunnan Tutkimuksen Toimikunta
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Misinformation and Its Impacts
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.

Reluctant arbiters of truth: Discursive legitimation of platform interventions against COVID-19 misinformation — Matti Pohjonen, Salla-Maaria Laaksonen, et al. · New Media & Society (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS