Twitter is going out of its way to verify the accounts of some of the most prominent students who survived the Parkland shooting

Twitter has verified the accounts of some of the most publicly outspoken students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., where a shooter killed 17 people last week.

Survivors have taken to social media to make loud calls for gun control, which have been met with abuse and the spread of misinformation about the teenagers online. The recent move by Twitter to verify the students is yet another example of how big the current discussion around gun regulation has become, and an example of how the company hopes to add credibility to users who are at the center of a debate riddled with misinformation.

Much of the discussion about what to do in the aftermath of the mass shooting has played out on Twitter and Facebook. A number of the students who have taken to the social networks to speak out against gun violence and push lawmakers to enact stricter gun regulations have been met with resistance from conservative groups trying to discredit their validity.

Conspiracy theories have started to widely circulate claiming that some of the most visible student activists are not actually students but “crisis actors” meant to carry a message for liberals and other anti-gun lobbyists. (They are not.)

Twitter, for its part, says that it’s actively working to stop users from harassing Parkland students, and has started to add blue verification checkmarks to some of their accounts in the past 24 hours. A company spokesperson shared the following statement with Recode.

We are actively working on reports of targeted abuse and harassment of a number of survivors of the tragic mass shooting in Parkland, Florida. Such behavior goes against everything we stand for at Twitter, and we are taking action on any content that violates our terms of service.

We are also using our anti-spam and anti-abuse tools to weed out malicious automation around these individuals and the topics they are raising. We have also verified a number of survivors’ Twitter accounts.

A Twitter spokesperson clarified that while the company’s terms of service do not explicitly prohibit anyone from sharing false information (or a conspiracy theory), the company is looking closely at accounts sharing this material to ensure that they aren’t violating any of Twitter’s other policies. For example, is it being shared in an attempt to be abusive? Is it being shared by a bot?

Twitter’s decision to verify Parkland students shows just how big this recent push for gun regulation has gotten. Twitter’s public verification program, which allows users to apply for a blue verification badge, has been on hold since last fall. That means Twitter proactively verified the students’ accounts on its own.

It’s easy to see why. Some students who survived the shooting have been on TV almost daily since. One of the most outspoken students, Emma González, now has more than 255,000 followers.

The meaning of Twitter’s blue verification checkmark has evolved over the years. The company was criticized last fall for verifying members of the so-called alt-right, including the white supremacist who helped organize the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Va., back in August. Twitter’s verification has historically been seen as a stamp of approval rather than a simple identity verification, which is why people got upset.

After the backlash, Twitter updated its verification guidelines to more clearly explain that a checkmark is intended to properly identify “accounts of public interest” and to ensure that people aren’t following imposters. It’s not necessarily a company endorsement.

Twitter isn’t the only company dealing with abuse and misinformation following the Parkland shooting. YouTube has removed conspiracy theory videos that made it to the top of the site’s trending section. Facebook, too, appears to be removing user accounts that are spreading misinformation. A Facebook company spokesperson did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

Will you support Vox’s explanatory journalism?

Most news outlets make their money through advertising or subscriptions. But when it comes to what we’re trying to do at Vox, there are a couple of big issues with relying on ads and subscriptions to keep the lights on:

First, advertising dollars go up and down with the economy. We often only know a few months out what our advertising revenue will be, which makes it hard to plan ahead.

Second, we’re not in the subscriptions business. Vox is here to help everyone understand the complex issues shaping the world — not just the people who can afford to pay for a subscription. We believe that’s an important part of building a more equal society. And we can’t do that if we have a paywall.

So even though advertising is still our biggest source of revenue, we also seek grants and reader support. (And no matter how our work is funded, we have strict guidelines on editorial independence.)

If you also believe that everyone deserves access to trusted high-quality information, will you make a gift to Vox today? Any amount helps.

One-Time Monthly Annual

$5/month

$10/month

$25/month

$50/month

Other

$

Yes, I'll give $5/month

Yes, I'll give $5/month

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via