{"source":{"name":"The Evidence Hub - on the regulation of digital services","url":"https:\/\/evidencehub.net","license":"Creative Common CC-BY 4.0 International"},"data":[{"data":[59,27,24],"name":"Percentage of posts rated as false still active with no clear warning on each platform"}],"_data":[["Online platform","Percentage of posts rated as false still active with no clear warning on each platform"],["Twitter","59"],["YouTube","27"],["Facebook","24"]],"labels":{"name":"Online platform","values":["Twitter","YouTube","Facebook"]},"metadata":{"link":"https:\/\/reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk\/types-sources-and-claims-covid-19-misinformation","type":"Problem","unit":"Per Cent (%)","year":"2020","title":"Percentage of Active False Posts With No Direct Warning Label ","topic":"Disinformation","method":"Survey ","source":"Brennen, J. Scott, Felix Simon, Philip N. Howard, Rasmus Kleis Nielsen. \"Types, Sources and Claims of COVID-19 Misinformation,\" Reuters Institute, 07 April 2020","sub_topic":"Prevalence of illegal content","chart_number":"102","geographical":"European Union"},"description":"The chart shows the percentage of posts in Reuters Institute's sample rated as false that were still active and did not have a clear label at the end of March 2020 (Twitter: (N=43; YouTube: N=6; Facebook: N=33) out of the total number of posts on each platform in the sample (Twitter: N= 73; YouTube: N= 22; Facebook: N=137)."}