Hello Kalev, Not a small group but a large community. An example is this "news community" (http://rotter.net/forum/listforum.php) in hebrew, where news are discussed in a forum, and fake or biased news are detected thru group discussion. This project is cited here <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254074310_Online_News_Exposure_and_Trust_in_the_Mainstream_Media_Exploring_Possible_Associations> . Best regards, Yohanan Ouaknine PhD candidate Bar Ilan University, Israel On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 5:17 PM, kalev leetaru <kalev.leetaru5@gmail.com> wrote:
One final set of thoughts on the topic of false and misleading news - it is important to remember that even the marque brands in journalism all-too-often run stories without the most cursory of verification:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/12/15/what- santa-and-the-dying-child-story-teaches-us-about-fake- news-data-and-verification/
And that academia itself has a huge and growing problem with verification and "truth" courtesy of a growing trend to cite without reading and the expanding issue of predatory publishers:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/12/16/how- academia-google-scholar-and-predatory-publishers-help- feed-academic-fake-news/
And that as a whole the fact checkers themselves are less than transparent about their inner workings, with one (Snopes) refusing even to provide even the most basic of insight into its screening and reliability processes:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/12/22/the- daily-mail-snopes-story-and-fact-checking-the-fact-checkers/
There is also the question about the right to expression online - once Facebook begins flagging news as false, it will have a database of who is consuming and attempting to share that content. Could it flag such users as "gullible" and sell them as a special category to advertisers, or perhaps even ban them entirely from its platform?:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/12/17/ should-we-fight-fake-news-by-banning-gullible-people-from-the-internet/
There is also the issue of how to handle controversial topics like police shootings - what does one do in a case like Laquan McDonald, in which the official police report concluded something very different from what witnesses observed? Would Facebook flag or even block all of the conversation about the shooting that differed from what police claimed?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/12/23/what- happens-when-fake-news-is-real-news/
Putting this all together, it does raise the critical question of whether it really is the right approach to declare a small group of elites to act as the ultimate arbitrators of "truth" for 1.7 billion people around the world:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/12/24/ facebooks-fake-news-detector-and-the-myth-of-technology-as-savior/
Kalev http://kalevleetaru.com/ http://blog.gdeltproject.org/
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 8:28 AM, kalev leetaru <kalev.leetaru5@gmail.com> wrote:
The concept of "fake news" is very complex, ranging from satirical to misleading to malicious content and, when looking globally, covers not just social media, but SMS and FTF communication. Much like humor, where one person's hilarious joke might be deeply offensive to another, a good portion of "fake news" revolves around how societies and peoples with different backgrounds interpret and construct meaning from a shared set of information. Paul Linebarger's 1948 book "Psychological Warfare" is a powerful read into the roots and methodology of inorganic constructionism of the kind that underlies much of the hundred shades of gray that we today frequently label as "fake news." This is also why purely technological solutions will always struggle with this complex middle ground that constitutes a large portion of "fake news." Instead, "information literacy" coupled with technological assistance offer perhaps the most robust path forward.
You can see more in my latest pieces:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/11/30/why- stopping-fake-news-is-so-hard/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/12/10/the- inverted-pyramid-and-how-fake-news-weaponized-modern- journalistic-practice/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/12/11/the- global-perspective-on-fake-news/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/12/11/how- data-and-information-literacy-could-end-fake-news/
Kalev http:/kalevleetaru.com/ http://blog.gdeltproject.org/
On Friday, December 9, 2016, Yosem Companys <companys@stanford.edu> wrote:
Anyone know of any academic studies showing that fake (social media) news influenced the 2016 presidential election outcome?
Thanks, Yosem _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org <javascript:;> mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers
Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/ listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/ listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
-- Yohanan Ouaknine <http://www.twitter.com/yohananouaknine> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/yohananouaknine> This e-mail is for the sole use of the intended recipient and contains information that may be privileged and/or confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this e-mail and any attachments. *P* *Think of the environmental impact before printing this page *