Please or to access all these features

Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Could MNHQ please clarify its policy with regard to tackling misinformation and disinformation on the site?

297 replies

MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack · 11/10/2026 12:57

There is a lot of misinformation and disinformation here on Mumsnet. I expect most site users will be aware of this. It is not unique to Mumsnet by any means - disinformation is everywhere on the Internet these days.

The Mumsnet reporting function has an option which explicitly allows users to report posts as "misinformation". However, it is not clear to me as to what MNHQ's policy is for dealing with such reports, and I would be grateful if this could be clarified.

On previous occasions, when I have reported unequivocally false statements on Mumsnet, I have been told that MNHQ doesn't have the ability to check whether claims are factual or not, and so I should challenge the false statements on the relevant thread instead. I know that other posters have received similar responses.

I can sort of accept the explanation that the moderators may not have either the time or the skills to fact check everything, though I do personally think there is still an argument that MNHQ should take more responsibility for preventing the spread of disinformation via their site. However, I have found it harder to understand why they still provide an option for reporting misinformation if they do not actually feel that they are able to tackle it in practice. Is it merely to give the impression that they might do something about it?

Yesterday, I reported a post which contained a false statement that was presented as fact. It was not a statement that could be open to interpretation or a matter of subjective judgement. It was simply false, and demonstrably so.

I did not receive any response to the report for many hours. Then eventually I received a response which stated that the post did not break Talk Guidelines and that it would therefore be left to stand so that it could be challenged on the thread.

I responded to the email to ask for clarification as to whether misinformation or disinformation is now permitted under Talk Guidelines, and to ask what the "report misinformation" function was for if this is no longer breaking Talk Guidelines. I have not received any response to that query. However, a few minutes after sending it, I received a separate email (from the same moderator), thanking me for reporting the post in question and confirming that the post had been deleted. The email made no reference to the earlier emails, didn't explain the earlier statement that the post hadn't broken any Talk Guidelines, didn't address the questions that I had asked. I checked the thread, and the false post had indeed been deleted. But I don't think it would have been if I had not pushed back.

It is difficult to have much faith in Mumsnet moderation when such inconsistencies arise. The most charitable explanation that I can think of is that the moderator didn't really bother checking the post properly before initially deciding to allow it to stand.

I do appreciate that the moderators are human, and that they will make mistakes sometimes, but this seems to happen far more often than it should. Could MNHQ please shed some light on the specific procedures that are followed when reports of misinformation are received, and what the actual policy is with regard to dealing with misinformation and disinformation when it is identified.

Thank you

OP posts:
TemperanceWest · 17/10/2026 12:08

noblegiraffe · 17/10/2026 11:56

I would genuinely like to know which part of the guidelines that post broke because I've seen far worse stand.

I have emailed mnhq to ask. There was a post on another thread that touched on the same issue which was deleted and then reinstated.

SwedishEdith · 17/10/2026 12:13

I didn't see it but it's quite ironic mnhq was quick to delete on a thread about their very hesitancy to delete mis/disinformation.

TemperanceWest · 17/10/2026 12:22

Curbedenthusiasm · 14/10/2026 12:53

Hi @BeckyAMumsnet

Just to get an idea, would MN consider the below post to be ‘misinformation’ and remove it?

‘Labour is a Nazi Party’.

By way of example.

This post was allowed to stand, and rightly so. I guess we are allowed to speculatively use the word "Nazi" in relation to some political parties but not others.

BIossomtoes · 17/10/2026 12:24

The guidelines appear to be remarkably fluid.

MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack · 17/10/2026 12:37

Perhaps MNHQ distinguish between statements that nobody could ever take seriously and those which people might take seriously?

OP posts:
Curbedenthusiasm · 17/10/2026 12:45

TemperanceWest · 17/10/2026 12:22

This post was allowed to stand, and rightly so. I guess we are allowed to speculatively use the word "Nazi" in relation to some political parties but not others.

I guess we are allowed to speculatively use the word "Nazi" in relation to some political parties but not others.

That’s an inaccurate statement, I’m afraid.

TemperanceWest · 17/10/2026 12:48

MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack · 17/10/2026 12:37

Perhaps MNHQ distinguish between statements that nobody could ever take seriously and those which people might take seriously?

Yes, possibly!

Piggywaspushed · 17/10/2026 13:30

That is one of the most ridiculous post deletions I have ever seen.

BIossomtoes · 17/10/2026 13:32

Piggywaspushed · 17/10/2026 13:30

That is one of the most ridiculous post deletions I have ever seen.

Especially since a virtually identical post is still there.

Piggywaspushed · 17/10/2026 13:36

Not been reported I assume.

noblegiraffe · 17/10/2026 19:07

Piggywaspushed · 17/10/2026 13:36

Not been reported I assume.

Which raises the question of who on earth was offended enough to report that one? On a thread where it is generally agreed that differences of opinion shouldn't be deleted?

And where MNHQ said they wouldn't delete them!

Piggywaspushed · 17/10/2026 19:10

I mean, call me cynical, but I imagine it was faux offence.

noblegiraffe · 17/10/2026 19:24

Piggywaspushed · 17/10/2026 19:10

I mean, call me cynical, but I imagine it was faux offence.

You'd have thought so, in which case what the bloody hell was MNHQ doing deleting it instead of the 'we are looking into this' brush-off?

Especially after @BeckyAMumsnet spent so much time explaining how carefully they weigh up these things. Is she bashing her head against her desk somewhere saying to some moderation AI 'you deleted what??'

TemperanceWest · 17/10/2026 20:53

I had no response to my email. Maybe @BeckyAMumsnet could explain when she is next around.

Llttledrummergirl · 17/10/2026 23:58

Perhaps mnet could add a message to posts reported as disinformation/misinformation that they don't understand enough to take down.

A simple this post has been reported as potential disinformation/misinformation would at least alert other users to be suspicious and not take as fact.

It would also add a point to the report button.

Clavinova · 18/10/2026 17:19

TemperanceWest · 14/10/2026 15:34

@BeckyAMumsnet there is a poster currently posting false information about migrants being secretly flown into the UK. Is that acceptable? Fact check below.

uk.news.yahoo.com/fact-checked-false-claims-migrants-100000602.html

The fact-checker isn't correct either though;

In his post, Cllr Davies posted: "So WHY ON Earth is the British government flying migrants directly into the UK from ANOTHER safe country?"

The answer is, simply, they are not.

They are. We know that they are - at least 1,117 individuals were transferred to the UK from France under the 'one in one out' deal (as of 30 June 2026).

The airline in your link, AlbaStar, was clearly involved in the 'one in one out' scheme - referred to here;

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/feb/19/rights-groups-airlines-deportation-flights-british-french

Therefore, it seems entirely plausible that an AlbaStar plane, originally departing from Tarbes in France, has flown migrants/asylum seekers into the UK - if not on this flight, then on a similar flight. I don't think we can dismiss the alleged eyewitness account out of hand.

The mis/disinformation might simply be that the government has been flying people into the UK 'secretly' - since we already know that they've been doing it.

TemperanceWest · 18/10/2026 17:42

Clavinova · 18/10/2026 17:19

The fact-checker isn't correct either though;

In his post, Cllr Davies posted: "So WHY ON Earth is the British government flying migrants directly into the UK from ANOTHER safe country?"

The answer is, simply, they are not.

They are. We know that they are - at least 1,117 individuals were transferred to the UK from France under the 'one in one out' deal (as of 30 June 2026).

The airline in your link, AlbaStar, was clearly involved in the 'one in one out' scheme - referred to here;

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/feb/19/rights-groups-airlines-deportation-flights-british-french

Therefore, it seems entirely plausible that an AlbaStar plane, originally departing from Tarbes in France, has flown migrants/asylum seekers into the UK - if not on this flight, then on a similar flight. I don't think we can dismiss the alleged eyewitness account out of hand.

The mis/disinformation might simply be that the government has been flying people into the UK 'secretly' - since we already know that they've been doing it.

Ta Clav. I would discuss further but I have to go out now. But I will leave you this little chap.

Dance Bakery GIF by Butter baby
Curbedenthusiasm · 19/10/2026 19:26

TemperanceWest · 17/10/2026 20:53

I had no response to my email. Maybe @BeckyAMumsnet could explain when she is next around.

Did you follow up with Becky, TW?

Clavinova · 19/10/2026 22:35

I think TW may have been kidnapped by a giant pretzel.

TemperanceWest · 20/10/2026 09:02

Curbedenthusiasm · 19/10/2026 19:26

Did you follow up with Becky, TW?

The timing of your question is very interesting CE.

Curbedenthusiasm · 20/10/2026 09:15

TemperanceWest · 20/10/2026 09:02

The timing of your question is very interesting CE.

Perfect!

Beachtastic · 20/10/2026 19:00

I don't know if I'm allowed to ask this, but WTF happened in the year or so after 7/10/23? The CITME board was insane with spamming and malicious disinformation. Hundreds, maybe thousands, or threads were left untouched that seem to have been deleted retrospectively. I stepped away from MN for a while so might have missed whatever must have happened to address what looked very much like MN being targeted by some very bad actors.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread