Fact Check: How many bots are there on twitter

Published May 28, 2025

•By

VERDICT

Partially True

# How Many Bots Are There on Twitter? ## Introduction The claim regarding the number of bots on Twitter has garnered significant attention, particula...

How Many Bots Are There on Twitter?

Introduction

The claim regarding the number of bots on Twitter has garnered significant attention, particularly in light of ongoing discussions about the platform's integrity and the influence of automated accounts. Various estimates suggest a wide range of bot prevalence, from as low as 5% to as high as 15% or more of total accounts. This article will explore the available data and analyses surrounding this claim without reaching a definitive conclusion.

What We Know

Definition of Twitter Bots: A Twitter bot is a software application that automates the posting and interaction on Twitter. Bots can serve various purposes, including legitimate uses like news dissemination and malicious activities such as spreading misinformation 1.
Estimates of Bot Prevalence:
- A Pew Research Center report suggests that approximately 15% of Twitter accounts are considered bots 6.
- An internal review by Twitter indicated that fewer than 5% of its users are fake or spam accounts 4.
- A study presented at EMNLP 2023 estimated that the bot population is crucial for understanding misinformation on social media 2.
Recent Trends: Reports indicate that the volume of simple bots has increased, with generative AI contributing to this rise. In 2023, simple bots constituted about 40% of the total bot activity, up from 33% in 2022 5.
Traffic Analysis: A separate analysis of Twitter traffic indicated that about 8.55% of all traffic from Twitter was invalid, with organic traffic showing a higher invalid rate than paid traffic 3.

Analysis

The estimates of bot prevalence on Twitter vary significantly, raising questions about the methodologies used to arrive at these figures.

Source Reliability:
- The Pew Research Center is generally considered a reputable source for social research, but their methodologies can sometimes be criticized for lack of transparency in how they define and identify bots 6.
- Twitter's internal estimates may be biased, as they are self-reported figures that could underrepresent the true number of bots to maintain user trust and platform integrity 4.
- The EMNLP study provides a scholarly approach to bot detection but may be limited by the specific datasets used and the evolving nature of bot behavior 2.
Conflicting Data: The discrepancy between the 5% and 15% estimates suggests a need for clearer definitions of what constitutes a "bot." The term can encompass a wide range of automated accounts, from benign to harmful, complicating the assessment of their prevalence.
Methodological Concerns: Many studies rely on sampling methods or specific datasets, which may not be representative of the entire user base. For example, the analysis of invalid traffic does not directly correlate to the number of bots but rather indicates the effectiveness of bot detection methods 3.
Potential Conflicts of Interest: Articles from sources like Forbes and MUO may have an agenda to highlight the negative impacts of bots, potentially skewing the interpretation of data to fit a narrative about social media's challenges 5 7.

Conclusion

Verdict: Partially True

The claim regarding the number of bots on Twitter is partially true, as there is evidence supporting both higher and lower estimates of bot prevalence. The Pew Research Center's estimate of approximately 15% contrasts sharply with Twitter's internal assessment of fewer than 5%. This discrepancy highlights the complexities in defining what constitutes a bot and the methodologies used to identify them.

While some studies suggest a significant presence of bots, particularly in the context of misinformation, the reliability of these sources and their methodologies raises questions about the accuracy of the estimates. Furthermore, the evolving nature of bot behavior and the potential biases in self-reported data from Twitter complicate the overall understanding of bot prevalence.

It is important to acknowledge the limitations of the available evidence, as many studies rely on specific datasets or sampling methods that may not fully represent the entire Twitter user base. The conflicting data points suggest that while there is a notable presence of bots, the exact percentage remains uncertain.

Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate information and consider the nuances behind statistics related to social media and automated accounts.

Sources

Twitter bot - Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_bot
BotPercent: Estimating Bot Populations in Twitter Communities. Retrieved from https://aclanthology.org/2023.findings-emnlp.954/
We Checked Elon Musk's Claims About Twitter Bots; Here's What We Found. Retrieved from https://www.cpomagazine.com/cyber-security/we-checked-elon-musks-claims-about-twitter-bots-heres-what-we-found/
Twitter Bots Percentage: How Many Bots Are On Twitter? Retrieved from https://earthweb.com/blog/how-many-bots-are-on-twitter/
Yes, The Bots Really Are Taking Over The Internet - Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/emmawoollacott/2024/04/16/yes-the-bots-really-are-taking-over-the-internet/
How Many Bots Are on Twitter and Does It Matter? Retrieved from https://www.thetechedvocate.org/how-many-bots-are-on-twitter-and-does-it-matter/
How Many Bots Are on Twitter and Does It Matter? - MUO. Retrieved from https://www.makeuseof.com/how-many-bots-on-twitter/
How many Twitter bots are there really? And does it even matter? Retrieved from https://knowtechie.com/how-many-twitter-bots-are-there-really-and-does-it-even-matter/
The Tweet Beat: Your Guide to Key Twitter Statistics & Facts for 2023. Retrieved from https://blog.twitteraudit.com/twitter-statistics-facts-2023/

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:

"Coffee helps you live longer"

✓100% Free

✓No Registration

✓Instant Results

Comments

Loading comments...

Check another claim

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: Transcript
00:00
I cannot believe that Trump is
cutting Medicaid. Actually,
what I meant to say is that I
can't believe he's not cutting
more of it because medicaid is
a money laundering scheme for
your government.
Congratulations all you
bleeding heart democrats.
Instead of raging against the
machine, you're bending over
for it. Medicaid is jointly run
by the states and the feds and
for every one dollar that your
state allocates to the program,
the Feds turn around and match
that at a level of one 00
percent so one dollar up to
nine dollars. And this money
comes from taxpayers in other
00:34
states. Your money has a 900%
return rate at someone else's
expense. Why wouldn't you
expand the program? Thanks
Obama. That's exactly how we
wound up with way too many
Medicaid recipients in the
first place. Like everything
related to healthcare the
providers are in bed with the
government on this one too
because the government can tax
the providers. 1. Use that
dollar to collect the up to
nine dollars in federal funds
and to reimburse the provider
their original dollar. What?
Robbing the taxpayer to pad the
funding pool leading to
increase reimbursements for
01:06
Medicaid for the providers.
Yeah, if I'm a doctor or a
health care facility, I'm
saying sign me up to that. Yes,
the medical industrial complex
totally has your best interest
in mind so go ahead and swallow
up those vaccines like a good
little comrade. Age me harder
daddy. And speaking of
comrades, do you know how many
people in this country receive
Medicaid that shouldn't? Before
you start screaming, everyone
should get free health care.
Not the argument here. We do
not have universal health care
in the United States. It
doesn't work and since we don't
have it, that means someone is
paying for it and guess what?
There are lower-income families
01:37
who don't qualify for the
benefits but they're taxpayers
and they're being burdened by
this. Back to the point which
is that the system is insanely
abused. I used to do child
support referee work for years
and you would v

Partially True

🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 I cannot believe that Trump is cutting Medicaid. Actually, what I meant to say is that I can't believe he's not cutting more of it because medicaid is a money laundering scheme for your government. Congratulations all you bleeding heart democrats. Instead of raging against the machine, you're bending over for it. Medicaid is jointly run by the states and the feds and for every one dollar that your state allocates to the program, the Feds turn around and match that at a level of one 00 percent so one dollar up to nine dollars. And this money comes from taxpayers in other 00:34 states. Your money has a 900% return rate at someone else's expense. Why wouldn't you expand the program? Thanks Obama. That's exactly how we wound up with way too many Medicaid recipients in the first place. Like everything related to healthcare the providers are in bed with the government on this one too because the government can tax the providers. 1. Use that dollar to collect the up to nine dollars in federal funds and to reimburse the provider their original dollar. What? Robbing the taxpayer to pad the funding pool leading to increase reimbursements for 01:06 Medicaid for the providers. Yeah, if I'm a doctor or a health care facility, I'm saying sign me up to that. Yes, the medical industrial complex totally has your best interest in mind so go ahead and swallow up those vaccines like a good little comrade. Age me harder daddy. And speaking of comrades, do you know how many people in this country receive Medicaid that shouldn't? Before you start screaming, everyone should get free health care. Not the argument here. We do not have universal health care in the United States. It doesn't work and since we don't have it, that means someone is paying for it and guess what? There are lower-income families 01:37 who don't qualify for the benefits but they're taxpayers and they're being burdened by this. Back to the point which is that the system is insanely abused. I used to do child support referee work for years and you would v

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 I cannot believe that Trump is cutting Medicaid. Actually, what I meant to say is that I can't believe he's not cutting more of it because medicaid is a money laundering scheme for your government. Congratulations all you bleeding heart democrats. Instead of raging against the machine, you're bending over for it. Medicaid is jointly run by the states and the feds and for every one dollar that your state allocates to the program, the Feds turn around and match that at a level of one 00 percent so one dollar up to nine dollars. And this money comes from taxpayers in other 00:34 states. Your money has a 900% return rate at someone else's expense. Why wouldn't you expand the program? Thanks Obama. That's exactly how we wound up with way too many Medicaid recipients in the first place. Like everything related to healthcare the providers are in bed with the government on this one too because the government can tax the providers. 1. Use that dollar to collect the up to nine dollars in federal funds and to reimburse the provider their original dollar. What? Robbing the taxpayer to pad the funding pool leading to increase reimbursements for 01:06 Medicaid for the providers. Yeah, if I'm a doctor or a health care facility, I'm saying sign me up to that. Yes, the medical industrial complex totally has your best interest in mind so go ahead and swallow up those vaccines like a good little comrade. Age me harder daddy. And speaking of comrades, do you know how many people in this country receive Medicaid that shouldn't? Before you start screaming, everyone should get free health care. Not the argument here. We do not have universal health care in the United States. It doesn't work and since we don't have it, that means someone is paying for it and guess what? There are lower-income families 01:37 who don't qualify for the benefits but they're taxpayers and they're being burdened by this. Back to the point which is that the system is insanely abused. I used to do child support referee work for years and you would v

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Jul 27, 2025

Partially True

🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Donny’s sent Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche to ‘interview’ Ghislaine Maxwell, who is currently serving twenty years in prison for trafficking teenage girls for Jeffrey Epstein. wait, did I say Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche? I should have said Donny’s personal attorney Todd Blanche — because that’s what Todd was before Donny appointed him to the DOJ. how convenient, to have one’s own personal attorney running interference as the second-in-command at the DOJ. so Blanche is talking to Maxwell. here’s the adminstration’s official bullshit cover story, as dutifully stenographed by the worthless scribblers of The New York Times. The interview with Ms. Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking, is part of the department’s effort to quell criticism that it is concealing details of Mr. Epstein’s crimes and interactions with high-profile figures, including President Trump. oh, I see — they’re ‘quelling criticism.’ how in the holy name of fuck does that work? does anyone believe that justice is what this is about? if you do, I have five bankrupt casinos in Atlantic City to sell you. we all goddamn well know that Blanche is down there offering Ghislaine a deal. it’s probably something like ‘exonerate Donny. tell everyone he did nothing wrong, and Donny will pardon you on the spot.’ you’d be naive to think otherwise. because that’s how the most corrupt administration in the history of corruption rolls. it’s a fucking cover-up, is what it is. let’s go to Akaash Singh one more time: ‘they’re hiding something CRAZY.’

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Donny’s sent Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche to ‘interview’ Ghislaine Maxwell, who is currently serving twenty years in prison for trafficking teenage girls for Jeffrey Epstein. wait, did I say Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche? I should have said Donny’s personal attorney Todd Blanche — because that’s what Todd was before Donny appointed him to the DOJ. how convenient, to have one’s own personal attorney running interference as the second-in-command at the DOJ. so Blanche is talking to Maxwell. here’s the adminstration’s official bullshit cover story, as dutifully stenographed by the worthless scribblers of The New York Times. The interview with Ms. Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking, is part of the department’s effort to quell criticism that it is concealing details of Mr. Epstein’s crimes and interactions with high-profile figures, including President Trump. oh, I see — they’re ‘quelling criticism.’ how in the holy name of fuck does that work? does anyone believe that justice is what this is about? if you do, I have five bankrupt casinos in Atlantic City to sell you. we all goddamn well know that Blanche is down there offering Ghislaine a deal. it’s probably something like ‘exonerate Donny. tell everyone he did nothing wrong, and Donny will pardon you on the spot.’ you’d be naive to think otherwise. because that’s how the most corrupt administration in the history of corruption rolls. it’s a fucking cover-up, is what it is. let’s go to Akaash Singh one more time: ‘they’re hiding something CRAZY.’

Jul 26, 2025