Search results

To elaborate the nature of fact-checking in the domain of political information by examining how fact-checkers assess the validity of claims concerning the Russo-Ukrainian conflict and how they support their assessments by drawing on evidence acquired from diverse sources of information.

Descriptive quantitative and qualitative content analysis of 128 reports written by the fact-checkers of Snopes – an established fact-checking organisation – during the period of 24 February 2022 – 28 June, 2023. For the analysis, nine evaluation grounds were identified, most of them inductively from the empirical material. It was examined how the fact-checkers employed such grounds while assessing the validity of claims and how the assessments were bolstered by evidence acquired from information sources such as newspapers.

Of the 128 reports, the share of assessments indicative of the invalidity of the claims was 54.7%, while the share of positive ratings was 26.7%. The share of mixed assessments was 15.6%. In the fact-checking, two evaluation grounds, that is, the correctness of information and verifiability of an event presented in a claim formed the basis for the assessment. Depending on the topic of the claim, grounds such as temporal and spatial compatibility, as well as comparison by similarity and difference occupied a central role. Most popular sources of information offering evidence for the assessments include statements of government representatives, videos and photographs shared in social media, newspapers and television programmes.

As the study concentrated on fact-checking dealing with political information about a specific issue, the findings cannot be extended to concern the fact-checking practices in other contexts.

The study is among the first to characterise how fact-checkers employ evaluation grounds of diverse kind while assessing the validity of political information.

This research examines the evolution of automated fact-checking at Africa Check, a prominent fact-checking organisation based in South Africa, Kenya, Nigeria and Senegal, through the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) tools into its fact-checking process. The progress focuses on three phases, which include claim detection to identify check-worthy claims, claim matching to retrieve already verified information and robot-checking to validate claims. The methodology used in this study involved analysing the experiences of reporters and editors from Africa Check. In-depth interviews were conducted to reveal the advances in time and effort required to verify information, providing key insights into the relationship between technology and journalism. The findings also shed light on how AI can be used to combat misinformation and promote media literacy in Africa, demonstrating how the adoption of AI has helped Africa Check to expand its reach and increase its impact. As a result, these improvements have profound implications for political accountability, trust in the media, and the fight against misinformation. This research offers valuable contributions to the ongoing debates about the adoption of technology in journalism and the importance of leveraging technology to strengthen the relationship between journalists and their audiences.

Given the rapid growth in efforts on misinformation correction, the study aims to test how evidence type and veracity interact with news agreement on the effectiveness of fact-checking on how well a corrective message discount a false news information.

Experimental participants (N = 511) in Hong Kong were exposed to the same news article and then to a piece of corrective information debunking the news article with variation in the types of evidence (numerical vs narrative) and veracity (no verdict vs half false vs entirely false) in 2019.

Among the participants who disagreed with the news article, numerical fact-checking was more effective than narrative fact-checking in discounting the news article. Some evidence of the backfire effect was found among participants for whom the article was attitude incongruent.

When debunking false information with people exposed to attitude-incongruent news, a milder verdict presented in the form of a half-false scale can prompt a more positive perception of the issue at stake than an entirely false scale, implying that a less certain verdict can help in mitigating the backfire effect compared to a certain verdict.

Fact-checking is a process of seeking and displaying facts to confirm or counter uncertain information, which reduces the spread of fake news. However, little is known about how to promote fact-checking posts to online users on social media. Through uncertainty reduction theory and message framing, this first study examines the effect of fact-checking posts on social media with an avatar on online users' trust, attitudes, and behavioral intentions. The authors further investigate the congruency effects between promotional message framing (gain/loss/neutral) and facial expressions of the avatar (happy/angry/neutral) on online users' trust, attitudes, and behavioral intentions in the second study.

The authors conducted two studies and statistically analyzed 120 samples (study 1) and 519 samples (study 2) from Facebook users.

Results showed that including the neutral facial expression avatar in fact-checking posts leads to online users' greater trust and more positive attitudes. Furthermore, the congruency effects between loss message framing and the angry facial expression of the avatar can effectively promote online users' trust and attitudes as well as stronger intentions to follow and share.

This study offers theoretical implications for fact-checking studies, and practical implications for online fact-checkers to apply these findings to design effective fact-checking posts and spread the veracity of information on social media.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how contemporary fact-checking is discursively constructed in Swedish news media; this serves to gain insight into how this practice is understood in society.

A selection of texts on the topic of fact-checking published by two of Sweden’s largest morning newspapers is analyzed through the lens of Fairclough’s discourse theoretical framework.

Three key discourses of fact-checking were identified, each of which included multiple sub-discourses. First, a discourse that has been labeled as “the affirmative discourse,” representing fact-checking as something positive, was identified. This discourse embraces ideas about fact-checking as something that, for example, strengthens democracy. Second, a contrasting discourse that has been labeled “the adverse discourse” was identified. This discourse represents fact-checking as something precarious that, for example, poses a risk to democracy. Third, a discourse labeled “the agency discourse” was identified. This discourse conveys ideas on whose responsibility it is to conduct fact-checking.

A better understanding of the discursive construction of fact-checking provides insights into social practices pertaining to it and the expectations of its role in contemporary society. The results are relevant for journalists and professionals who engage in fact-checking and for others who have a particular interest in fact-checking, e.g. librarians and educators engaged in media and information literacy projects.

Employing the cognitive mediation model, the study aims to examine a moderated-mediation mechanism of social media news use contingent upon elaboration on political knowledge through fact-checking – specifically, the interaction effect of social media news with elaboration on fact-checking.

The moderated-mediation model is tested using panel survey data collected during the 2016 USA presidential election (N = 1,624 at Wave 1; N = 637 at Wave 2).

The findings reveal that social media news users are frequent visitors of fact-checking websites. Results also suggest that those with increased social media news use and cognitive elaboration on news content are more likely to visit fact-checking sites, which contributes to increased political knowledge.

The results of the current study, especially in the era of social media environment where various information is overflowing, suggest an important role of individuals' responsibility as democratic citizens given that people's cognitive elaboration and surveillance efforts, which tries to think about important public issues they consume through media, could strengthen a positive pathway toward informed citizens.

By exploring the social features of contemporary fact-checking this study aims to increase our understanding of fact-checking as a genre and shed light on some of the aspects that underpin the communication that fact-checkers engage in.

By analyzing one snapshot of early COVID-19 coverage by three well-known fact-checkers and another one six months later, this study explores fact-checking as a genre. The material was examined for recurrent characteristics and the findings were categorized into corresponding themes that emerged through an open coding process.

Three aspects were found to underpin a contemporary fact-checking genre. Firstly, the fact-checkers strive to facilitate accessibility. Secondly, the notion of building trust underlies the way fact-checkers promote themselves. Thirdly, fact-checking is underpinned by a pedagogical aspect. While the values and beliefs that are known to characterize traditional news media discourses are predominant in the construction of a fact-checking genre, fact-checkers also draw on conceptions typically found within academia to enact professional practices.

Contemporary fact-checking is still a fairly unexplored topic of research. This is particularly the case outside the field of journalism and media studies. This study complements earlier research from the perspective of information studies by exploring how fact-checking practices impact the communication and production of news in society.

The purpose of this research is to evaluate the extent to which credibility of news sources and fact-checkers individually and jointly influence online users' beliefs and intended behaviors regarding online misinformation. The broader goal is to understand why fact-checking seems to have inconsistent effects on the beliefs and behavioral intentions about disinformation. 10;

An online experiment was conducted in a public health (COVID-19) context with 429 validated participants to test three hypotheses linking the main and interaction effects of two independent variables (news source credibility and fact-checker credibility) on three dependent variables (users' believability, reading intention and sharing intention of online news claims). The data was analyzed using multilevel (fixed effects) models controlling for individual differences, claim differences and order effects.

The author observed a nuanced pattern of effects; news source credibility had a positive main effect on believability but negative effects on reading and sharing intention; fact-checking credibility had a positive main effect on believability, but no effects on reading or sharing intentions, but negatively moderated the effects of source credibility on all three dependent variables.

This paper introduces, conceptualizes and tests whether a more credible fact-checker shapes the beliefs and intentions about online misinformation differently from less credible fact-checkers, especially when examined concurrently with similar effects of the original sources of misinformation claims. Additionally, it suggests that, on average, users have a low perception of credibility for fact-checkers (even reputed ones), which may explain why fact-checking is often ineffective in shaping the beliefs and intended behaviors.

This chapter examines strategies deployed at individual and institutional levels to combat fake news in two media houses in Uganda. Grounded in the hierarchy of influences model, we examine journalists' and editors' perspectives on how Vision Group and Nation Media Group newsrooms respond to fake news. Journalists' and editors' responses, obtained through semi-structured interviews as well as document review enabled us to underscore the centrality of professional standards, training and technology in combating fake news. We found that technology plays a key role in fact-checking, although newsrooms are yet to adopt advanced digital tools such as artificial intelligence (AI) and algorithms. The newsrooms under investigation deploy conventional hardware and software to detect, flag and debunk fake news. We posit that for the strategies adopted at the organisational level to succeed, they ought to appeal to individual reporters' goals and interests. Further, discourses on adoption of newer technology ought to reflect the contexts in which the news organisations operate in addition to their financial standing.