Content moderation on social media can result in the removal, demotion or labelling of content that platforms deem to have violated their rules. Moderation is an important tool in mitigating systemic risks on platforms, especially when it comes from misinformation and disinformation. However, if moderation goes wrong, it can lead to content being either over-moderated (too much being inappropriately taken down) or under-moderation (not enough content that violates platform’s rules being taken down). 

This research set out to see if the content moderation systems of three major platforms—TikTok, Facebook and X—was over- or under-moderated and if it displayed political bias when it came to content relating to the Voice referendum in Australia. 

Key findings

• Limited evidence of platform over-moderation or bias was found, although it was noted that X may over-moderate #VoteNo content, and Facebook may favour #VoteNo content in its video recommender algorithm.
• Misinformation was substantially under-moderated across all three platforms; but no political bias was detected.
• There is a substantial, potentially systemic issue regarding under-moderation of misinformation.

This research suggests that the measures from the Australian Code of Practice on Disinformation and Misinformation might not be effectively preventing the under-moderation of content. It is also evident that the signatories’ transparency reports have not identified the issues highlighted by this research.