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 · 14/10/2026 11:36

MNHQ is now happy for posters to use MN to disseminate disinformation spread by Russell Brand (and his followers) of all people. It astounds me tbh.

BIossomtoes · 14/10/2026 11:39

TemperanceWest · 14/10/2026 11:36

MNHQ is now happy for posters to use MN to disseminate disinformation spread by Russell Brand (and his followers) of all people. It astounds me tbh.

I’ve reported that with a side dish of hate speech. It’s disgusting.

TemperanceWest · 14/10/2026 11:42

BIossomtoes · 14/10/2026 11:39

I’ve reported that with a side dish of hate speech. It’s disgusting.

The response from MNHQ

Hi TemperanceWest,

As before, we’ve taken a look and the post you reported doesn’t break our Talk guidelines and in any case we'd rather that the discussion took place on the board itself rather than us preventing people from seeing what has been posted.

We appreciate you taking the time to report, however, it always helps to build a picture

BIossomtoes · 14/10/2026 11:46

TemperanceWest · 14/10/2026 11:42

The response from MNHQ

Hi TemperanceWest,

As before, we’ve taken a look and the post you reported doesn’t break our Talk guidelines and in any case we'd rather that the discussion took place on the board itself rather than us preventing people from seeing what has been posted.

We appreciate you taking the time to report, however, it always helps to build a picture

Edited

🤯

BIossomtoes · 14/10/2026 11:47

Bizarrely it’s now been zapped.

BIWI · 14/10/2026 11:49

Consistency is inconsistent.

Raiderofthelostbattenburg · 14/10/2026 11:54

I reported the same posts. I'm glad they've been deleted now. But it's genuinely shocking that the first post wasn't enough to be deleted on its own and that it took the poster doubling down on their pro-Russian propaganda and anti-semitic conspriacy theories for action to be taken.

Twiglets1 · 14/10/2026 11:55

Raiderofthelostbattenburg · 14/10/2026 11:54

I reported the same posts. I'm glad they've been deleted now. But it's genuinely shocking that the first post wasn't enough to be deleted on its own and that it took the poster doubling down on their pro-Russian propaganda and anti-semitic conspriacy theories for action to be taken.

Ugh should have been deleted immediately

BIWI · 14/10/2026 11:56

I wonder how much that was to do with the first post (I think) being a YouTube link? And whether anyone from MNHQ actually watched it?

TemperanceWest · 14/10/2026 12:06

God knows. The poster has been banned now, thankfully.

Raiderofthelostbattenburg · 14/10/2026 12:06

I think there must be stronger action Mumsnet can take on pro-Russian and pro-Iranian propaganda - especially given the Chief of MI5 explicitly warned against this kind of thing in his annual briefing yesterday. Isn't it the case that there are other key words - for example a particular type of currency, frequently associated with spamming - where the post is automatically hidden until the moderators have had chance to take a look? Surely, there are certain key words, frequently associated with dangerous conspiracy theories, that could be similarly flagged? I understand the moderators themselves are only human, but there must be more rigorous systems that could be deployed.

Curbedenthusiasm · 14/10/2026 12:25

TemperanceWest · 14/10/2026 12:06

God knows. The poster has been banned now, thankfully.

How do you know they have been banned?

princessofgreyskuII · 14/10/2026 12:28

Tessgirl · 11/10/2026 14:40

I agree OP. But if HQ removed all mis and dis information on here I think there would probably be very little left.

This. Its far easier to make a disclaimer of seek out your own medical advice or legal advice or whatever advice it is than for mods to be scouring the site constantly for misinformation.

Noone should be taking advice from random people online, thats so obvious I am shocked it needs to be said

TemperanceWest · 14/10/2026 12:32

Curbedenthusiasm · 14/10/2026 12:25

How do you know they have been banned?

I received a further email response from MNHQ after the one I posted above. Of course the poster concerned could have more than one MN account, but that particular account has been banned.

TemperanceWest · 14/10/2026 12:33

Raiderofthelostbattenburg · 14/10/2026 12:06

I think there must be stronger action Mumsnet can take on pro-Russian and pro-Iranian propaganda - especially given the Chief of MI5 explicitly warned against this kind of thing in his annual briefing yesterday. Isn't it the case that there are other key words - for example a particular type of currency, frequently associated with spamming - where the post is automatically hidden until the moderators have had chance to take a look? Surely, there are certain key words, frequently associated with dangerous conspiracy theories, that could be similarly flagged? I understand the moderators themselves are only human, but there must be more rigorous systems that could be deployed.

Edited

I would really like to hear MNHQ's thoughts on this @BeckyAMumsnet

Curbedenthusiasm · 14/10/2026 12:35

Wrong thread.

BeckyAMumsnet · 14/10/2026 12:46

TemperanceWest · 14/10/2026 12:33

I would really like to hear MNHQ's thoughts on this @BeckyAMumsnet

Edited

Thanks for your question. We do understand the concern especially when there’s so much misinformation around on the wider internet.

There’s no doubt that disinformation campaigns exist, but we don’t have evidence that any particular state backed campaign is operating on Mumsnet, and we don’t want to jump to that conclusion about individual posters. It’s quite a serious allegation to make, and people can repeat the same talking points for all sorts of reasons.

We do have systems in place to help us spot and review posts that may need a closer look, alongside reports from users of course. We can’t go into the detail of particular filters, partly because that would make them easier to get around.

It’s also worth saying that Mumsnet isn’t necessarily the obvious first choice for this sort of activity. Many threads tend to be long and very context heavy, and posts don’t spread at the speed they can on the bigger social platforms. That doesn’t make us immune, of course, and we always keep our approach under review, but it does mean the risk may look different here than on, say, Facebook or X.

As ever, the most useful thing is to report posts or accounts that worry you. That lets the team look at the actual content and the wider context, rather than trying to make assumptions about who may be behind it.

BIossomtoes · 14/10/2026 12:51

Thanks @BeckyAMumsnet. That doesn’t, however, explain the initial decision to leave those posts and the subsequent change of mind.

Curbedenthusiasm · 14/10/2026 12:53

BeckyAMumsnet · 14/10/2026 12:46

Thanks for your question. We do understand the concern especially when there’s so much misinformation around on the wider internet.

There’s no doubt that disinformation campaigns exist, but we don’t have evidence that any particular state backed campaign is operating on Mumsnet, and we don’t want to jump to that conclusion about individual posters. It’s quite a serious allegation to make, and people can repeat the same talking points for all sorts of reasons.

We do have systems in place to help us spot and review posts that may need a closer look, alongside reports from users of course. We can’t go into the detail of particular filters, partly because that would make them easier to get around.

It’s also worth saying that Mumsnet isn’t necessarily the obvious first choice for this sort of activity. Many threads tend to be long and very context heavy, and posts don’t spread at the speed they can on the bigger social platforms. That doesn’t make us immune, of course, and we always keep our approach under review, but it does mean the risk may look different here than on, say, Facebook or X.

As ever, the most useful thing is to report posts or accounts that worry you. That lets the team look at the actual content and the wider context, rather than trying to make assumptions about who may be behind it.

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.

TemperanceWest · 14/10/2026 13:06

🙄

BeckyAMumsnet · 14/10/2026 13:19

BIossomtoes · 14/10/2026 12:51

Thanks @BeckyAMumsnet. That doesn’t, however, explain the initial decision to leave those posts and the subsequent change of mind.

At a guess, @blossomtoes, this was a cock up rather than a conspiracy - but if you can give is more info, we can look into it in detail.

BIossomtoes · 14/10/2026 13:52

BeckyAMumsnet · 14/10/2026 13:19

At a guess, @blossomtoes, this was a cock up rather than a conspiracy - but if you can give is more info, we can look into it in detail.

Thank you. They’ve been dealt with now and that’s the main thing.

LastTrainsEast · 14/10/2026 14:08

If it's a massive bot campaign then there's an argument for having the means to deal with it, but if it's just stupid people repeating what they heard on Tiktok there's a case for leaving it up and having everyone explain to them why they are wrong.

It may even help the poster, but it clarifies things for people who might be misled.

Even if MN had the resources to check. Even the most unbiased moderator could make a mistake and delete something important and true and deleting it is too final.

Some means to mark it as possibly untrue might be useful - perhaps a simple clickable counter? If you see that "27 people said this post contained misinformation" it's still only the opinion of 27 people and they could be biased, but now you know to go and check properly elsewhere before you go and tell your neighbour about it.

BIWI · 14/10/2026 14:56

@princessofgreyskuII

Its far easier to make a disclaimer of seek out your own medical advice or legal advice or whatever advice it is than for mods to be scouring the site constantly for misinformation.

The moderators don't 'scour' the site. There are far, far too many posts each day for them to do that! They only see posts that are reported to them.

BIWI · 14/10/2026 14:58

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.

I'd say that's actually a rather stupid and offensive thing, rather than being either misinformation or disinformation.

But what do you think? How would you define that statement?