Following the 2016 U.S. presidential election, many have expressed concern about the effects of false stories (“fake news”), circulated largely through social media. We discuss the economics of fake news and present new data on its consumption prior to the election. Drawing on web browsing data, archives of fact-checking websites, and results from a new online survey, we find: (i) social media was an important but not dominant source of election news, with 14 percent of Americans calling social media their “most important” source; (ii) of the known false news stories that appeared in the three months before the election, those favoring Trump were shared a total of 30 million times on Facebook, while those favoring Clinton were shared 8 million times; (iii) the average American adult saw on the order of one or perhaps several fake news stories in the months around the election, with just over half of those who recalled seeing them believing them; and (iv) people are much more likely to believe stories that favor their preferred candidate, especially if they have ideologically segregated social media networks.

/pdf/social-media-and-fake-news-in-the-2016-election-1m4ttkb5mo.pdf

Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election

The spread of fake news on social media became a public concern in the United States after the 2016 presidential election. We examined exposure to and sharing of fake news by registered voters on Twitter and found that engagement with fake news sources was extremely concentrated. Only 1% of individuals accounted for 80% of fake news source exposures, and 0.1% accounted for nearly 80% of fake news sources shared. Individuals most likely to engage with fake news sources were conservative leaning, older, and highly engaged with political news. A cluster of fake news sources shared overlapping audiences on the extreme right, but for people across the political spectrum, most political news exposure still came from mainstream media outlets.

Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should Know and the Public Should Expect. Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel. New York: Crown Publishers, 2001. 205 pp. $20 hbk. Inherent in the behavior and process we call "journalism" is controversy. Journalism's inexact, less-than-scientific character almost assures it will occasionally enter a crisis, becoming awash in change, its self-identity threatened or its credibility challenged. Just as naturally, we can depend on someone to attempt to right the ship, calm the waters, and smooth the sails. Enter The Elements of Journalism, which simply lists and details what the authors consider journalism's ten guiding principles and purpose for the enlightenment of journalists and the general public. For the former, the book serves as a Journalism 101 moral refresher: Journalism's purpose is truth, produced by those loyal to that purpose and to the citizens (not to profits). Committee of Concerned journalists Chairman Bill Kovach and Project for Excellence in journalism Director Tom Rosenstiel assert, however, that truth is not enough: There is also verification, to which they devote a chapter that's as good a reporting primer as any textbook. The authors explain "the intellectual principles of a science of reporting" gleaned from numerous discussions with and surveys of editors, journalists, and members of the public. As a CCJ member, I applaud the effort: Journalists need to be reminded of their profession's high ethical objective. Any craft-journalism included-requires a howto inventory. For the public, the book provides a glimpse into why serious journalists behave as they do; journalism has a purpose over and above selling newspapers and airtime. The lay reader discovers there is a rationale for what journalists cover and that not only is journalism a map with which to navigate society, but that good journalism strives to be accurate and comprehensive. But it is not enough to index-as the text does-all the proper characteristics. To be sure, the authors credibly explain each item. For example, they say journalists have an obligation to monitor the powerful because-as investigative reporting gets trivialized (thanks to consumer-oriented topics such as the honesty of auto brake mechanics) and challenged-journalism's function as a public forum becomes weakened, giving way to "a new wave of journalism as assertion." But as if it were Moses coming down from the Big Newsroom In The Sky, the book comes off as so many pronouncements. This is no text for a skeptic; while each element gets its due in terms of description and analysis, there is no Burning Bush-no original explanation exists for the list as a whole. By its structure, the text expects the reader to accept the idea that journalism is a recipe. The book makes a weak attempt at synthesis in the last chapter, in which the authors claim that journalists' responsibility to conscience ties all the other elements together. On its face, this makes sense: For example, what journalist would not say his or her conscience is the reason for his or her search (via journalism) for truth? But the final chapter does not engage in such analytical application of the elements, choosing instead to elaborate on the role of conscience in newsrooms and the threat certain newsroom cultures pose against individual conscience. …

The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should Know and the Public Should Expect

The explosive growth in fake news and its erosion to democracy, justice, and public trust has increased the demand for fake news detection and intervention. This survey reviews and evaluates methods that can detect fake news from four perspectives: the false knowledge it carries, its writing style, its propagation patterns, and the credibility of its source. The survey also highlights some potential research tasks based on the review. In particular, we identify and detail related fundamental theories across various disciplines to encourage interdisciplinary research on fake news. It is our hope that this survey can facilitate collaborative efforts among experts in computer and information sciences, social sciences, political science, and journalism to research fake news, where such efforts can lead to fake news detection that is not only efficient but, more importantly, explainable.

A Survey of Fake News: Fundamental Theories, Detection Methods, and Opportunities

Here I propose that the phenomenon of “fake news” is indicative of the contested position of news and the dynamics of belief formation in contemporary societies. It is symptomatic of the collapse o...

Truth is What Happens to News

This paper is based on a review of how previous studies have defined and operationalized the term “fake news.” An examination of 34 academic articles that used the term “fake news” between 2003 and...

Zheng Wei Lim

Papers

Defining “Fake News”: A typology of scholarly definitions