Pinned post
The State of the "X" OSINT Community,
a message to the 'OSINT' accounts.
Let’s all take a step back and look at the broader “OSINT” community, especially after Elon Musk’s changes.
What do we actually see?
Engagement Farmers.
The majority of these accounts claim to do OSINT and even include it in their name. But most of them don’t do the work. At best, they’re bad news aggregators — copying and pasting information without citing sources, rewriting descriptions to grab attention, and shaping opinions based on unverified data. They chase attention, not accuracy. In other words, they’re engagement farmers.
These accounts make up most of what’s now labeled as “OSINT.”
News aggregators.
Then there’s a second group — the news aggregators who at least add some value. They collect and organize information into threads or perform basic analyses that make data easier to understand. Importantly, they also give proper credit to the original sources. For them, it’s not about being the first to post — it’s about gathering reliable information and presenting it clearly and responsibly.
OSINT.
Finally, there are the 'real' OSINT accounts.
A definition: "OSINT is the practice of collecting, analyzing, and interpreting publicly available information from open sources to produce insights for decision-making, threat assessment, and investigations."
The real OSINT accounts go beyond aggregation.
They verify locations, identify equipment types, and perform full investigations — turning raw data into actionable, verified insights.
Mistakes.
And yes, even OSINT accounts make mistakes. Why?
Because OSINT is only as accurate as the information available at the time of analysis. That’s why verifying the basic data used in any analysis must always be a priority. Crediting sources is equally important — it allows others to understand the reasoning behind the analysis and, if necessary, to verify the same sources independently.
When new information emerges, earlier conclusions may turn out to be flawed. It’s then the responsibility of the OSINT account to evaluate whether the new data impacts the final assessment. If it does, the correct course of action is clear: delete the original post and start again. Deletion is the only acceptable response when an error alters the conclusion.
GeoConfirmed.
We know where we stand:
GeoConfirmed is a verification community of more than 100 volunteers, dedicated to answering factual “where” questions.
Does that make us an OSINT account? That’s not for us to decide.
In four years, GeoConfirmed has made seven mistakes — just seven. Each time, we reviewed our verification process, because seven out of more than 60,000 published geolocations is still seven too many.
That’s the level of responsibility our admin team has committed to. We guarantee where something happened — not what happened, and not when. With the exemption for our 'investigations' where we used the geolocation as a basis for a further analysis.
And in every one of those seven cases, we deleted our tweets and posted corrections.
How many accounts, even 'OSINT' accounts, get fact-based feedback, even Community Notes, but never make corrections? For them, it’s not about the facts. The initial tweet draws attention — and that’s what matters most to them.
How to handle mistakes.
Everyone can make mistakes. There is only one correct response to a mistake: delete the tweet and post a new one with the correction.
Let’s be very clear about this. Accounts that post a “correction” in a follow-up tweet are still benefiting from the attention generated by the original post. They aren’t prioritizing facts — they’re preserving engagement. The correction will never reach as many people as the original tweet, meaning the misinformation or disinformation continues to spread.
Deleting the mistaken tweet and reposting it with the correct information is the only responsible solution.
---
So, if you call yourself an OSINT account, ask yourself this:
Am I part of the third group? Am I doing what should be expected from an OSINT account?
If the answer is no, then you are not an OSINT account and shouldn’t present yourself as one. Unless you take concrete steps to meet the standards of real OSINT work, you’re not contributing to the field: you’re merely chasing attention under a false label. That doesn’t make you an OSINT account — it makes you a fraud, using OSINT for attention, and adding noise instead of value.
---
Pictured:
GeoConfirmed’s admin team verified geolocations conducted by the GeoConfirmed volunteer community, as well as contributions from other volunteers, related to the Ukraine–Russia conflict.
Over 50,000+ GeoConfirmed locations where events occured.
(geoconfirmed.org/ukraine)
a message to the 'OSINT' accounts.
Let’s all take a step back and look at the broader “OSINT” community, especially after Elon Musk’s changes.
What do we actually see?
Engagement Farmers.
The majority of these accounts claim to do OSINT and even include it in their name. But most of them don’t do the work. At best, they’re bad news aggregators — copying and pasting information without citing sources, rewriting descriptions to grab attention, and shaping opinions based on unverified data. They chase attention, not accuracy. In other words, they’re engagement farmers.
These accounts make up most of what’s now labeled as “OSINT.”
News aggregators.
Then there’s a second group — the news aggregators who at least add some value. They collect and organize information into threads or perform basic analyses that make data easier to understand. Importantly, they also give proper credit to the original sources. For them, it’s not about being the first to post — it’s about gathering reliable information and presenting it clearly and responsibly.
OSINT.
Finally, there are the 'real' OSINT accounts.
A definition: "OSINT is the practice of collecting, analyzing, and interpreting publicly available information from open sources to produce insights for decision-making, threat assessment, and investigations."
The real OSINT accounts go beyond aggregation.
They verify locations, identify equipment types, and perform full investigations — turning raw data into actionable, verified insights.
Mistakes.
And yes, even OSINT accounts make mistakes. Why?
Because OSINT is only as accurate as the information available at the time of analysis. That’s why verifying the basic data used in any analysis must always be a priority. Crediting sources is equally important — it allows others to understand the reasoning behind the analysis and, if necessary, to verify the same sources independently.
When new information emerges, earlier conclusions may turn out to be flawed. It’s then the responsibility of the OSINT account to evaluate whether the new data impacts the final assessment. If it does, the correct course of action is clear: delete the original post and start again. Deletion is the only acceptable response when an error alters the conclusion.
GeoConfirmed.
We know where we stand:
GeoConfirmed is a verification community of more than 100 volunteers, dedicated to answering factual “where” questions.
Does that make us an OSINT account? That’s not for us to decide.
In four years, GeoConfirmed has made seven mistakes — just seven. Each time, we reviewed our verification process, because seven out of more than 60,000 published geolocations is still seven too many.
That’s the level of responsibility our admin team has committed to. We guarantee where something happened — not what happened, and not when. With the exemption for our 'investigations' where we used the geolocation as a basis for a further analysis.
And in every one of those seven cases, we deleted our tweets and posted corrections.
How many accounts, even 'OSINT' accounts, get fact-based feedback, even Community Notes, but never make corrections? For them, it’s not about the facts. The initial tweet draws attention — and that’s what matters most to them.
How to handle mistakes.
Everyone can make mistakes. There is only one correct response to a mistake: delete the tweet and post a new one with the correction.
Let’s be very clear about this. Accounts that post a “correction” in a follow-up tweet are still benefiting from the attention generated by the original post. They aren’t prioritizing facts — they’re preserving engagement. The correction will never reach as many people as the original tweet, meaning the misinformation or disinformation continues to spread.
Deleting the mistaken tweet and reposting it with the correct information is the only responsible solution.
---
So, if you call yourself an OSINT account, ask yourself this:
Am I part of the third group? Am I doing what should be expected from an OSINT account?
If the answer is no, then you are not an OSINT account and shouldn’t present yourself as one. Unless you take concrete steps to meet the standards of real OSINT work, you’re not contributing to the field: you’re merely chasing attention under a false label. That doesn’t make you an OSINT account — it makes you a fraud, using OSINT for attention, and adding noise instead of value.
---
Pictured:
GeoConfirmed’s admin team verified geolocations conducted by the GeoConfirmed volunteer community, as well as contributions from other volunteers, related to the Ukraine–Russia conflict.
Over 50,000+ GeoConfirmed locations where events occured.
(geoconfirmed.org/ukraine)
