Determine the comparative prevalence of AI-generated disinformation across platforms

Determine how much AI-generated and AI-altered disinformation appears on Facebook, Instagram, Threads, TikTok, and X/Twitter, overcoming the limitations of the small, non-random sample and the selection bias toward claims circulating on Meta-owned platforms.

Background

The dataset includes content circulating on all major platforms examined and suggests possible differences in volume, audience, and virality across platforms. However, the sample is relatively small and was weighted toward claims circulating on Meta-owned platforms, so the observed patterns cannot establish the comparative prevalence of AI-generated disinformation on different services. The report explicitly leaves this empirical comparison unresolved.

References

With a relatively limited sample size, it was possible to draw only tentative conclusions about differences in behaviours on different platforms. Noting the sample size, the patterns suggested higher volumes of content identified on Facebook but greater virality on X/Twitter. They also indicated a focus on Facebook towards UK-targeted information and health treatment scams. X/Twitter accounted for more viral political content in general, while content on TikTok targeted younger audiences, including with health-related scams. Given both the sample size and a weighting in the factcheckers’ selection process toward claims circulating on Meta-owned platforms, it is, however, not possible to confidently assert that these indications prove how much such information appears on different platforms. Further research on this point may be useful.

— AI-Generated Disinformation in the UK: Risk of Harm, Context, and Classification  (2610.06084 - Cunliffe-Jones et al., 5 Oct 2026) in Section 4, “Findings: The Dataset,” subsection “Platform and actor types spreading AI-generated disinformation”