Fake news and trust and distrust in fact checking sites
2 likes2,226 views
The document discusses the complex dynamics of trust in online fact-checking services amidst the rise of fake news and misinformation. It highlights academic perspectives on defining fake news, the impact of social media on public perception, and challenges to the credibility of fact-checkers. Ultimately, the research emphasizes the need for transparency and integrity in fact-checking practices to cultivate public trust.
Fake news and trust and distrust in fact checking sites
- 1. University of Zurich 02.10.2017 1 Petter Bae Brandtzaeg SINTEF Digital pbb@sintef.no @petterbb In a world of fake news – Do people trust fact-checkers?
- 2. 2 2013-2016
- 3. 3 Brandtzaeg, P. B., & Følstad, A. (2017). Trust and distrust in online fact- checking services. Communications of the ACM. 60(9): 65-71 Brandtzaeg, P. B., Følstad, A. & Chaparro Domínguez, M.Á. (2017, online first). How journalists and social media users perceive online fact-checking and verification services. Journalism Practice. Brandtzaeg, P. B., Lüders, M., Spangenberg, J., Rath-Wiggins, L., & Følstad, A. (2016). Emerging journalistic verification practices concerning social media. Journalism Practice, 10(3), 323-342.
- 4. Outline • How to understand fake news • Why are fake news important to investigate? • A new industry of fact-checking • Do people trust fact-checking sites? 4
- 6. Kids today are growing up in a digital reality of manipulation and fake as default 6
- 7. 7
- 8. 8
- 9. False information has existed as long as humans have told stories, the term “fake news” is recent 9
- 10. 10
- 11. How should we define fake news? 11
- 12. How do academic studies define fake news? • A paper in the journal Digital Journalism looks at how the term “fake news” has evolved across scholarly studies. Edson C. Tandoc Jr., Zheng Wei Lim, and Richard Ling, Nanyang Technological University, looked at 34 papers on fake news published between 2003 and 2017. • They found that “fake news” was most often used to refer to satirical “mock news programs” like The Daily Show, or parodies like The Onion — followed by “fabrication, manipulation, advertising, and propaganda.” 12
- 13. Fake news - a problematic term 13 Brandtzaeg, P. B., Følstad, A. & Chaparro Domínguez, M.Á. (2017, online first). How journalists and social media users perceive online fact-checking and verification services. Journalism Practice. The false information is intended
- 14. 14 (Fake news site) Source Dissemination Ads Aim Fake news in Norway vs US (Anonymous profile) (Confusion, political) Ads Source Dissemination Aim
- 15. 15
- 16. Distribution of harms – misinformation harming the public sphere 16 A Pew Internet Research report (2012) predicted “distribution of harms” due to the large quantity of inaccurate and false information in the near future. Source: Anderson, J. Q., & Rainie, L. (2012). “Big Data: Experts Say New Forms of Information Analysis Will Help People Be More Nimble and Adaptive, But Worry over Humans’ Capacity to Understand and Use These New Tools Well,” Pew Internet Research Report. Washington, DC.
- 17. 17 The global risk of massive digital misinformation sits at the centre of a constellation of technological and geopolitical risks ranging from terrorism to cyber attacks and the failure of global governance. This risk case examines how hyperconnectivity could enable “digital wildfires” to wreak havoc in the real world. Source: http://reports.weforum.org/global-risks-2013/risk-case-1/digital- wildfires-in-a-hyperconnected-world/#view/fn-12
- 18. Digital wildfire 1 The existence on YouTube of a video entitled “Innocence of Muslims”, uploaded by a private individual in the United States, sparked riots across the Middle East. These riots are estimated to have claimed more than 50 lives. The video titled "The Real Life of Muhammad", uploaded on July 1, 2012 18
- 19. Digital wildfire 2 Pizzagate is a conspiracy theory that went viral during the 2016 US presidential election. The personal e-mail of Hillary Clinton's campaign manager, was hacked and made public by WikiLeaks. Proponents of the Pizzagate theory falsely claimed that the e-mails contained coded messages referring to human trafficking and connecting a restaurant in the Washington DC and members of the Democratic Party with an satanic child-sex ring. 19
- 20. Digital wildfire 3 "The market recovered within a few minutes (….), vulnerability to breaking news in the age of social media" (.. trading algorithms that scan the news and trade quickly, causing "flash crashes". (Source: Guardian, April 23. 2013)
- 21. Lese nyheter via sosiale medier i % (Norge) 21 Two thirds of US. adults get news from social media. They are mainly using Facebook as a news source
- 22. 10 percent of people think of Facebook as a news outlet that produces the stories published on the site (Pew Research, 2016) 22 The more you engage with a particular kind of post, the more you will see its ilk. “Smart” algorithmic feeds that optimize for engagement.
- 23. But did facebook and social media affect the election? 23 • Social media wasn’t the major source of political news for most Americans in 2016; only 14 percent say they relied on Facebook and other social media sites as their most important source of election coverage. • “Social media was an important but not dominant source of news in the run-up to the election,” the authors write. Television, it turns out, remains the go-to place for political news. • Political polarization is more extreme in older people, who use social media less, than in the young.
- 24. 24 Social media are changing journalism The majority of journalists use social media (96% in UK, Social Journalism Study 2013, UK)
- 25. Social media as a "primary" news source for journalists 25 : ” • Before, we often used the phone calling, to find out whether anything had happened. Not many years ago we took the initiative. But now, the opposite is the case (.......), social media is now the place where you first get access to information. (...) The foundation for what you produce news-stories on is really from social media."
- 26. Fake news cause a great deal of confusion about the basic facts of current issues and events 26
- 27. Exposure to conspiracy theories decreases the intention to engage in politics Experiments suggest that conspiracy-like stories can inspire feelings of powerlessness and lead people to report lower likelihoods to engage politically. "People who were exposed to conspiracy theories about climate change reported less intention to reduce their carbon footprint (….) an feelings of powerless and uncertainty towards climate change, and also feelings of disappointment in climate scientists" ( p. 56) 27 Jolley, D., & Douglas, K. M. (2014). The social consequences of conspiracism: Exposure to conspiracy theories decreases intentions to engage in politics and to reduce one's carbon footprint. British Journal of Psychology, 105(1), 35-56.
- 28. New actors entering social media and news media (Chat)BOTS
- 29. Kilde: Anderson, A. A., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., Xenos, M. A., & Ladwig, P. (2014). The “nasty effect:” Online incivility and risk perceptions of emerging technologies. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 19(3), 373-387. TROLLS
- 30. 30 Alternative news media Ideological fight against Left-wing media
- 31. Men Who and how many read and share fake news? 31
- 32. How many have seen fake news? 45% of the Norwegian population (18-80 years) report that they on a daily basis (15%) or weekely (30%) see news online that they believe are fabricated or made up news stories Source: Norwegian Media Authority on Fake news (April 2017/N=1004) 32 Source: Norwegian Media Authority, IPSO Sweden, Pew Research US
- 33. Where do people see fake news? 33 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Facebook Mainstram media Search engines (e.g. Google) Youtube Alternative news media Twitter Instagram Other social media Other Dont know Where do you most often see untrue content presented as real news? (N=1004) Source: Norwegian Media Authority, April 2017
- 34. Who are sharing fake news? How often have you posted news stories online that you knew or suspected to be untrue? (N=1004) 34 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 18-22 years 23-35 years 36-55 years 56-80 years Several times Only one time Source: Norwegian Media Authority, April 2017 Pew Internet: 23% say they have shared a made-up news story – either knowingly or not
- 35. 96 active fact-checking initiatives in 2015 35 a 50% increase from the previous year http://reporterslab.org/fact-checking
- 36. Research into fact checking has scarcely paid attention to the general public's view of fact checking in how the public percive fact-checking 36 • ……. focusing instead on how people's beliefs and attitudes change in response to facts in general. • People often ignore facts that contradict their current beliefs, particularly in politics and controversial social issues.
- 37. Fact-checking vs verification services "Fact-checking services are individuals or organizations that analyze and determine the accuracy of claims and content in the public domain and guide users on the credibility of online content. (…) Fact-checking services typically have a broader potential user group than verification services as these provide complete analyses and assessments of online claims or content and may thus be useful for internet users" (ex. Snopes, Fact-check.org) "Verification services are tools that may support the process of authenticating onlinecontent items such as text, images, and videos. These tools often apply algorithms to make the verification process more efficient and accurate. Verification services are typically useful for specialized user groups such as journalists." (TinEye, Reverse Image Search to help find an image's source, duplicates or altered versions) Brandtzaeg, P. B., Følstad, A. & Chaparro Domínguez, M.Á. (2017, online first). How journalists and social media users perceive online fact-checking and verification services. Journalism Practice. 37
- 38. 38
- 40. Three categories of fact-checking services 40
- 41. 41
- 42. 42 5 months: Facebook: won’t share data on whether or not the program has been effective.
- 43. 43 What kind of third-party fac-checkers? They should follow a code of principals for fact-check developed at the Poynter Institute, a Florida-based journalism training organization. • A COMMITMENT TO NONPARTISANSHIP AND FAIRNESS We fact-check claims using the same standard for every fact check. We do not concentrate our fact-checking on any one side. We do not advocate or take policy positions on the issues we fact-check. • A COMMITMENT TO TRANSPARENCY OF SOURCES We want our readers to be able to verify our findings themselves. We provide all sources in enough detail that readers can replicate our work. • A COMMITMENT TO TRANSPARENCY OF FUNDING & ORGANIZATION We are transparent about our funding sources. If we accept funding from other organizations, we ensure that funders have no influence over the conclusions we reach in our reports. We detail the professional background of all key figures in our organization and explain our organizational structure. • A COMMITMENT TO TRANSPARENCY OF METHODOLOGY We explain the methodology we use to select, research, write, edit, publish and correct our fact checks. We encourage readers to send us claims to fact-check and are transparent on why and how we fact-check. • A COMMITMENT TO OPEN AND HONEST CORRECTIONS We publish our corrections policy and follow it scrupulously. We correct clearly and transparently in line with our corrections policy, seeking so far as possible to ensure that readers see the corrected version. International Fact Checking Code of Principles.
- 44. 44
- 45. 45
- 47. 47
- 48. 48 Not only are "everyone" creating news, but also "everyone" are creating facts….
- 49. 49 • People tend to ignore facts that contradict to their beliefs. • Do they also ignore fact-checking services? • Trust in news media is critical. Do people trust fact-checkers?
- 50. 50 • Insufficient knowledge about how to understand and measure trust in a new and multifaceted media landscape (Fisher, 2016). • Trust is seen as particularly relevant in situations characterized by perceived risk; that is => where something of value is seen as at stake (Mayer et al., 1995). • Applied to fact-checking, the perceived risk is related to the relationship between the user and fact-checker. Perceived risks may for example relate to whether the news consumer perceives the fact-checker to present an unbiased fact-checking process. Fisher, C. (2016). The trouble with ‘trust’ in news media. Communication Research and Practice, 1-15. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of management review, 20(3), 709-734. Tust is complex
- 51. Fact-checkers and challenges 51 • What kind of organizations should be fact-checkers? Fact-checking services differ in terms of their organizational aim and funding, as well as their areas of concern, that in turn may affect their trustworthiness (Brandtzaeg and Følstad, 2017) • How should they be considered independent or objective? • When should they report and debunk fake content? How much traffic and what is the tipping point? Can silence be the best response to mis- and dis- information? • How do should they write corrections? How can they maximize the positive impact of their fact-checking or corrections and minimize chances of blowback?
- 52. 52 Fact-checking services investigated Political/public claims Online rumors/hoaxes Specific topics
- 53. • Method: "Snopes is….." "factcheck.org is…" 53 • Social media conversations take place in the everyday context of users who are likely to be particularly engaged in fact-checking services.
- 54. 54 1.Usefulness, is it useful for my fact-checking task? (Tsakonas et al. 2008) 2.Trust (Mayer, Davis et al, 1995) • (a) Ability (skills, expertise), • (b) Benevolence (is the trustee believed to do good), • (c) Integrity (independent/objective/biased). • We manually coded post in social media related to…
- 55. 55 Coding scheme we used to analyze the data
- 56. 56 • • A majority of the social media users in this study are negative towards Snopes (69%) and FactCheck.org (56%), mainly due to a lack of trustworthiness. • • Conversely, 74% perceives StopFake as a useful source to combat the misinformation surrounding the Ukrainian crisis (Maybe fact-checking sites targeting a specific topic face less criticism because they are attracting a specific audience that are more goal-oriented in terms of their information need and fact- checking, e.g. people that are Ukrainians) Results: Lack of trust 69% 56% 26%
- 57. 57 Snopes is a unreliable left-leaning “fact-checking” site. I cannot understand why Snopes is ever cited as authoritative. It should be eliminated from any discussion either as confirming something or dismissing it Biased (integrity): Unreliable left-leaning
- 58. 58 George Soros and FactCheck.org are funded by UBER PROGRESSIVE LIBERALS AND COMMUNISTS! So don’t look to find the truth about anyone on the left or their agendas or policies from Snopes.com or FactCheck.org. You will only find LIES, DECEIT AND SPIN on the left! Benevolence: part in fraud or propaganda, or some larger conspiracy
- 59. 59 Snopes IS? A husband and wife, without any scientific background, without any investigatory experience. They get their info from Google. They are a joke. Ability: indicating a lack of expertise and low credibility
- 60. 60 It doesn’t take that much effort to see if something on the Internet is legit, and Snopes is a great place to start. So why not take that few seconds of extra effort to do that, rather than creating and sharing misleading items. Usefulness: Why not take a few seconds….
- 61. 61 Fact-checking services are often perceived as active players and biased players in an information war. Results: Biased and active players
- 62. 62 Among Trump supporters and young people, the fact-checking program could even backfire: Perceived accuracy is increased by the presence of disputed tags. Source: Pennycook, Gordon and Rand, David G., Assessing the Effect of 'Disputed' Warnings and Source Salience on Perceptions of Fake News Accuracy (September 15, 2017). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3035384
- 63. 63 • Our research is making clear how hard it is to stop people from believing false stories on social media, • and how difficult it is for fact-checkers to gain trust among different user groups. • Yet, we believe our study offers a template for future studies to achieve a global picture of what commenters are saying about active fact-checkers should help suggest new approaches to increase audience trust. Is there any hope for fact-checking efforts?
- 64. 64 Conclusion: How to develop public trust and trust from through openness and transparency? Who is doing it (integrity)? How is it being done? (skills)
- 65. 65 If this is now – what about the future?
- 66. Low critical thinking => belive in fake news Analytic thinking associated with more accurate spotting of fake and real news regardless of respondents' political ideology. Source: Who Falls for Fake News? The roles of analytic thinking, motivated reasoning, political ideology and bullshit receptivity. Gordon Pennycook & David G. Rand. Not yet published. 66
- 67. 67 The response should focus on people, not national security, says Nina Jankowicz of the Woodrow Wilson Center. "We need to teach people how to navigate this media environment."
- 68. 68 Contact: pbb@sintef.no or twitter @petterbb Thank you!