Via Isaac Kuo. Basically, fewer than half of the total shares of the 25 most-shared articles on climate change in 2017 were of articles with high or very high quality.
The piece also points out that they only looked at direct shares of the sources, not other articles or posts which were based on them and then also widely shared (something probably more common with low-quality information, I would suspect, since people who value high-quality information tend to cite sources).
Originally shared by Bill Smith
Many stories were written about climate science in 2017, but were the ones that “went viral” scientifically accurate? #ClimateChange