Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

Using a Turkish X Community combating medical misinformation as a single case, this paper examines how expertise is performed through evidence evaluation, professional boundary-work and visibility practices, showing how counter-misinformation also becomes authority work under platform conditions.

Paper long abstract

This paper examines a public X Community in Türkiye organized around combating medical misinformation. Rather than treating counter-misinformation simply as the correction of false or misleading claims, it asks how expertise, authority and legitimacy are produced under platform conditions. The study uses a qualitative single-case design, drawing on 142 posts shared between 1 March and 30 July 2026, together with Community rules and management profiles. Posting was highly centralized, with one founder-administrator producing 124 of the 142 posts.

The analysis identifies three main practices. First, expertise is performed through the evaluation of scientific evidence and research methods, including judgments about what particular studies can and cannot establish. Second, correction functions as professional boundary-work, distinguishing credible speakers from out-of-field, unreliable or pseudo-scientific actors and thereby distributing legitimacy. Third, correction is also visibility work, shaped by quote-posts, replies, videos, audience engagement and platform circulation. These practices show that combating medical misinformation is not only about correcting claims. It also helps define what counts as credible evidence, who may speak credibly, and what becomes visible on X. The paper therefore argues that counter-misinformation is also a form of authority work under platform conditions.