不情愿的真相仲裁者:针对COVID-19错误信息的平台干预的话语合法化

IF 4.3 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Tuomas Heikkilä, Salla-Maaria Laaksonen, Matti Pohjonen
{"title":"不情愿的真相仲裁者:针对COVID-19错误信息的平台干预的话语合法化","authors":"Tuomas Heikkilä, Salla-Maaria Laaksonen, Matti Pohjonen","doi":"10.1177/14614448251365270","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Major digital platforms have long resisted fact-checking their users, even as public concern about misinformation has grown. We explore how they legitimated a change in this policy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using blog posts by Meta, YouTube and Twitter, the study contributes to the body of research on content moderation by US-based platforms as they expand their policies into contested areas. Based on the theories of discursive legitimation, we examine the strategies platforms employ when presenting their actions in countering false and misleading health information. We show that the pandemic emerges as an important opportunity for platforms to narrate their legitimacy in society. Yet, the newly adopted responsibility to curb health misinformation does not signal a reform towards more truthful platforms, but temporary exceptions whose future is left open. These findings foreshadow the reversals of misinformation policies in recent years and highlight the continued importance of external regulation.","PeriodicalId":19149,"journal":{"name":"New Media & Society","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reluctant arbiters of truth: Discursive legitimation of platform interventions against COVID-19 misinformation\",\"authors\":\"Tuomas Heikkilä, Salla-Maaria Laaksonen, Matti Pohjonen\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14614448251365270\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Major digital platforms have long resisted fact-checking their users, even as public concern about misinformation has grown. We explore how they legitimated a change in this policy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using blog posts by Meta, YouTube and Twitter, the study contributes to the body of research on content moderation by US-based platforms as they expand their policies into contested areas. Based on the theories of discursive legitimation, we examine the strategies platforms employ when presenting their actions in countering false and misleading health information. We show that the pandemic emerges as an important opportunity for platforms to narrate their legitimacy in society. Yet, the newly adopted responsibility to curb health misinformation does not signal a reform towards more truthful platforms, but temporary exceptions whose future is left open. These findings foreshadow the reversals of misinformation policies in recent years and highlight the continued importance of external regulation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19149,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Media & Society\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Media & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448251365270\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Media & Society","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448251365270","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大型数字平台长期以来一直拒绝对用户进行事实核查,尽管公众对错误信息的担忧日益加剧。我们探讨了在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间,他们如何使这一政策的变化合法化。这项研究利用Meta、YouTube和Twitter发布的博客文章,对美国平台在将其政策扩展到有争议领域时进行的内容审核进行了研究。基于话语合法化理论,我们研究了平台在展示其打击虚假和误导性健康信息的行动时采用的策略。我们表明,大流行成为平台在社会中讲述其合法性的重要机会。然而,新通过的遏制健康错误信息的责任并不意味着向更真实的平台进行改革,而是暂时的例外,其未来仍是开放的。这些发现预示着近年来错误信息政策的逆转,并突出了外部监管的持续重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reluctant arbiters of truth: Discursive legitimation of platform interventions against COVID-19 misinformation
Major digital platforms have long resisted fact-checking their users, even as public concern about misinformation has grown. We explore how they legitimated a change in this policy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using blog posts by Meta, YouTube and Twitter, the study contributes to the body of research on content moderation by US-based platforms as they expand their policies into contested areas. Based on the theories of discursive legitimation, we examine the strategies platforms employ when presenting their actions in countering false and misleading health information. We show that the pandemic emerges as an important opportunity for platforms to narrate their legitimacy in society. Yet, the newly adopted responsibility to curb health misinformation does not signal a reform towards more truthful platforms, but temporary exceptions whose future is left open. These findings foreshadow the reversals of misinformation policies in recent years and highlight the continued importance of external regulation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
New Media & Society
New Media & Society COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
8.00%
发文量
274
期刊介绍: New Media & Society engages in critical discussions of the key issues arising from the scale and speed of new media development, drawing on a wide range of disciplinary perspectives and on both theoretical and empirical research. The journal includes contributions on: -the individual and the social, the cultural and the political dimensions of new media -the global and local dimensions of the relationship between media and social change -contemporary as well as historical developments -the implications and impacts of, as well as the determinants and obstacles to, media change the relationship between theory, policy and practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信