Verify any claim · lenz.io
Claim analyzed
General“A significant proportion of people share online articles without having read them.”
Submitted by Vicky
The conclusion
A major peer-reviewed study in Nature Human Behaviour, analyzing 56.4 billion Facebook shares, found that roughly 75% of news links were shared without the user clicking on them — strongly supporting the claim that "a significant proportion" of people share articles without reading them. However, the evidence primarily comes from one platform (Facebook, 2017–2020), and "shares without clicks" is a proxy for non-reading, not direct proof. The claim's broad framing slightly overstates what the data strictly demonstrates.
Based on 17 sources: 10 supporting, 0 refuting, 7 neutral.
Caveats
- The ~75% figure measures 'shares without clicks' on Facebook — a strong but imperfect proxy for not having read the article, since users could have read content through other means.
- Nearly all cited 'corroborating' sources are secondary write-ups of the same single study, not independent replications across different platforms or time periods.
- The evidence is drawn from Facebook public posts (2017–2020) and may not generalize to other social media platforms or current sharing behavior.
Get notified if new evidence updates this analysis
Create a free account to track this claim.
Sources
Sources used in the analysis
Shares without clicks accounted for 76.71% of the 56.4 billion recorded shares across all domains and URLs. Politically extreme content received significantly more shares without clicks than moderate content.
Here we analysed over 35 million public Facebook posts with uniform resource locators shared between 2017 and 2020, and discovered that such 'shares without clicks' (SwoCs) constitute around 75% of forwarded links.
This study provides a large-scale assessment of researchers' code sharing behavior upon request. With an overall sharing rate of 37.5%, our ...
Approximately 75% of the news links shared on Facebook are reposted without people reading the linked content before they share it. Researchers analyzed more than 42 billion instances of people sharing content without first clicking the link; shares without clicks accounted for more than three-quarters of all sharing activity.
This study systematically reviews 66 peer-reviewed journal articles published between 2020 and 2024, focusing on key research topics, theoretical frameworks, ... A total of 21 studies employed experimental methods, making it a significant approach in understanding information-sharing behaviors.
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the experiences and practices of researchers working with SMD in their research and gain insights into researchers' ... previous data sharing emerged as a significant positive predictor (b = 1.64, *p* < 0.001).
This study is one of the first to apply ELM to examine the influencing factors of users' decisions about sharing general articles on social media. We collected article data published by 13 WOAs over 6 months.
A study led by Penn State researchers revealed that more than 75% of people don't click through links to read the full content prior to sharing the link on Facebook. The study applied advanced machine learning to analyze more than 35 million public Facebook posts between 2017 and 2020.
75% of news links were blindly shared by users without checking the original news source attached to the post. The study, which applied advanced machine learning to analyze more than 35 million public Facebook posts between 2017 and 2020, was published in Nature Human Behaviour.
A new study has found that sharing posts on Facebook without clicking on the content is a widely prevalent phenomenon. The findings... are featured in 'Sharing Without Clicking on News in Social Media' published in Nature Human Behaviour on Nov. 19, 2024.
A 2010 study from MIT published in Science, “The Spread of Behavior in an Online Social Network Experiment,” compared the effectiveness of network clusters. Key study findings include: - Clustered networked were more successful in promoting a given action than a homogenous one. Approximately 54% of participants in the clustered network signed up for the website, while only 38% of those in the homogenous network did.
The researchers found that shares without clicks across all domains and URLs accounted for 76.71% of the 56.4 billion recorded shares. When users were politically aligned with a particular domain, like CNN or FOX News, they were more likely to share without clicking on the link.
Approximately 75% of the news links shared on Facebook are reposted without the users ever reading the content, researchers report.
A new study has revealed that 75% of news-related social media posts are shared without being read. Researchers from US universities analysed over 35 million Facebook posts from 2017 to 2020, finding that many users share links based on headlines, summaries, or the number of likes a post has received, without ever clicking to read the full article.
This paper develops an integrated model designed to review and explain the relationship about online content that consists of humor, sex, and informative and ...
A recent study from the University of Florida found that 75% of news links shared on Facebook are reposted without the sharer reading the content. This habit, called 'shares without clicks,' raises concerns about how social media spreads misinformation and influences public debate.
The study's analysis relied on aggregated data from Facebook only between 2017–2020, meaning researchers could not observe individual users' behaviors directly. Some shares without clicks might reflect deliberate resharing of familiar content. The findings have not been replicated on other platforms like Twitter or Instagram, so generalizability beyond Facebook remains unclear.
What do you think of the claim?
Your challenge will appear immediately.
Challenge submitted!
Expert review
How each expert evaluated the evidence and arguments
Expert 1 — The Logic Examiner
The logical chain from evidence to claim is strong but not perfect: Sources 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, and 16 all converge on the same empirical finding — approximately 75–77% of shared Facebook news links are "shares without clicks" — drawn from datasets of extraordinary scale (35+ million posts, 56.4 billion shares), and the claim only requires that "a significant proportion" share without reading, a threshold that ~75% easily clears. The opponent's strongest logical point — that "shares without clicks" is a proxy for "not having read," not direct proof, and that secondary sources are circular — is valid but insufficient to overturn the verdict: the proxy is reasonable (clicking is the only observable pathway to reading the linked content), the scale of the data is massive, and the claim's qualifier "significant proportion" is modest enough that even accounting for some prior-reading cases, the core assertion holds; the platform-specificity concern (Source 17) introduces a genuine scope limitation but does not falsify the claim, since Facebook's dominance in news sharing makes it a highly representative context, and the claim does not assert universality across all platforms.
Expert 2 — The Context Analyst
The claim is framed broadly (“people share online articles”) but the strongest evidence (Sources 1–2) operationalizes this as Facebook “shares without clicks” in public posts from 2017–2020, which is not the same as proving the sharer did not read the article (they could have read it elsewhere/earlier) and may not generalize to other platforms or current behavior (Source 17). With that context restored, it's fair to say a large share of Facebook link-sharing occurs without clicking, but the claim's wording overstates what is directly shown and implies a cross-platform, literal 'unread' conclusion that the study design cannot fully support, so the overall impression is misleading.
Expert 3 — The Source Auditor
The most authoritative sources here are Source 1 (Nature Human Behaviour, peer-reviewed, high-authority) and Source 2 (PubMed indexing the same study), both published November 2024, which robustly confirm that ~75–76.71% of shared links on Facebook were "shares without clicks" across a dataset of 56.4 billion shares — a finding of extraordinary statistical scale. Source 4 (PRSA) and Sources 8–10 are credible secondary reports of the same underlying research, and while the opponent correctly identifies that Sources 4, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, and 16 are largely circular (all reporting the same Nature Human Behaviour study rather than independently verifying the claim), this does not undermine the primary finding itself — it simply means the evidentiary base rests on one very large, high-quality peer-reviewed study. The opponent's caveat that "shares without clicks" is a proxy for unread articles is technically valid (Source 17 acknowledges individual reading behavior wasn't directly observed), and the study is limited to Facebook 2017–2020, but the scale of the data (56.4 billion shares) and the consistency of the ~75% figure make the proxy highly persuasive; the claim uses the word "significant proportion," which is clearly satisfied even under conservative interpretation. The claim is therefore well-supported by the most reliable evidence, with the minor caveat that "shares without clicks" is an imperfect but well-established proxy for not having read the article, and platform generalizability beyond Facebook is unconfirmed.
Expert summary
The arguments
Two AI advocates debated this claim using the research gathered.
Argument for
The claim is overwhelmingly supported by a convergence of highly authoritative, peer-reviewed evidence: Source 1 (Nature Human Behaviour) and Source 2 (PubMed) both report that "shares without clicks" constitute approximately 75–76.71% of all shared links, drawn from an analysis of over 35 million public Facebook posts and 56.4 billion recorded shares — a dataset of extraordinary scale that leaves no room for doubt about the prevalence of this behavior. This finding is independently corroborated by Source 4 (PRSA), Source 8 (Penn State University News), Source 9 (NJIT News), Source 10 (University of Florida), Source 12 (Advanced Science News), Source 13 (Futurity), Source 14 (Dig.Watch), and Source 16 (Adigaskell Blog), all consistently reporting the same ~75% figure, confirming that a significant — indeed dominant — proportion of people share online articles without having read them.
You're treating “shares without clicks” as identical to “shared without having read,” but Sources 1–2 only measure click-through behavior on Facebook links, and the brief itself notes researchers couldn't observe individual reading and that some no-click shares may reflect prior exposure or deliberate resharing (Source 17, Study limitations and scope). And your “independent corroboration” is mostly circular: Sources 4, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, and 16 are secondary write-ups recycling the same Facebook 2017–2020 result from Sources 1–2, so they don't broaden the claim to “people” across online contexts or establish actual unreadness beyond that proxy.
Argument against
The motion overgeneralizes from a single operational proxy—“shares without clicks”—measured on public Facebook posts from 2017–2020, which does not actually establish that “people” broadly “haven't read” the articles (they may have read elsewhere, already know the content, or be resharing deliberately), and the brief itself flags that individual reading behavior wasn't observed and cross-platform generalizability is unclear (Source 17, Study limitations and scope). Even the strongest cited evidence is therefore platform- and period-specific rather than evidence about a significant proportion of people across online contexts, making the claim as stated fundamentally misleading (Source 1, Nature Human Behaviour; Source 2, PubMed).
Your "they may have read it elsewhere" defense is pure speculation — Source 1 (Nature Human Behaviour) analyzed 56.4 billion recorded shares and found 76.71% were shares without clicks, and neither you nor Source 17 provide any empirical evidence that prior reading accounts for a meaningful fraction of that overwhelming majority, making your alternative explanation an unfounded logical leap. Furthermore, your platform-specificity objection actually undermines your own case: Facebook is the world's largest social media platform, and Source 4 (PRSA) confirms the same ~75% figure across more than 42 billion sharing instances, meaning the scale and consistency of the data is more than sufficient to establish that a "significant proportion of people" — by any reasonable definition — share articles without reading them.