研究说明:研究各种社交媒体平台如何应对新冠肺炎错误信息

N. Krishnan, Jiayan Gu, Rebekah Tromble, L. Abroms
{"title":"研究说明:研究各种社交媒体平台如何应对新冠肺炎错误信息","authors":"N. Krishnan, Jiayan Gu, Rebekah Tromble, L. Abroms","doi":"10.37016/mr-2020-85","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We analyzed community guidelines and official news releases and blog posts from 12 leading social media and messaging platforms (SMPs) to examine their responses to COVID-19 misinformation. While the majority of platforms stated that they prohibited COVID-19 misinformation, the responses of many platforms lacked clarity and transparency. Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and Twitter had largely consistent responses, but other platforms varied with regard to types of content prohibited, criteria guiding responses, and remedies developed to address misinformation. Only Twitter and YouTube described their systems for applying various remedies. These differences highlight the need to establish general standards across platforms to address COVID-19 misinformation more cohesively.","PeriodicalId":93289,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Kennedy School misinformation review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Research note: Examining how various social media platforms have responded to COVID-19 misinformation\",\"authors\":\"N. Krishnan, Jiayan Gu, Rebekah Tromble, L. Abroms\",\"doi\":\"10.37016/mr-2020-85\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We analyzed community guidelines and official news releases and blog posts from 12 leading social media and messaging platforms (SMPs) to examine their responses to COVID-19 misinformation. While the majority of platforms stated that they prohibited COVID-19 misinformation, the responses of many platforms lacked clarity and transparency. Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and Twitter had largely consistent responses, but other platforms varied with regard to types of content prohibited, criteria guiding responses, and remedies developed to address misinformation. Only Twitter and YouTube described their systems for applying various remedies. These differences highlight the need to establish general standards across platforms to address COVID-19 misinformation more cohesively.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93289,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Harvard Kennedy School misinformation review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"19\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Harvard Kennedy School misinformation review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-85\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard Kennedy School misinformation review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-85","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

摘要

我们分析了12个主要社交媒体和消息平台(SMPs)的社区指南、官方新闻稿和博客文章,以检查他们对新冠肺炎错误信息的反应。尽管大多数平台表示禁止新冠肺炎错误信息,但许多平台的回应缺乏明确性和透明度。脸书、Instagram、YouTube和推特的回应基本一致,但其他平台在禁止的内容类型、指导回应的标准以及为解决错误信息而制定的补救措施方面各不相同。只有推特和YouTube描述了他们应用各种补救措施的系统。这些差异突出表明,需要建立跨平台的通用标准,以更一致地应对新冠肺炎错误信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Research note: Examining how various social media platforms have responded to COVID-19 misinformation
We analyzed community guidelines and official news releases and blog posts from 12 leading social media and messaging platforms (SMPs) to examine their responses to COVID-19 misinformation. While the majority of platforms stated that they prohibited COVID-19 misinformation, the responses of many platforms lacked clarity and transparency. Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and Twitter had largely consistent responses, but other platforms varied with regard to types of content prohibited, criteria guiding responses, and remedies developed to address misinformation. Only Twitter and YouTube described their systems for applying various remedies. These differences highlight the need to establish general standards across platforms to address COVID-19 misinformation more cohesively.
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
CiteScore
20.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
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