全球视野下的事实核查透明度比较

IF 2.2 2区 文学 Q2 COMMUNICATION
Qiong Ye
{"title":"全球视野下的事实核查透明度比较","authors":"Qiong Ye","doi":"10.1080/17512786.2023.2211555","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In recent years, with the global proliferation of fake news, fact-checking has emerged globally, and transparency has become the consensus of global fact-checkers. Based on the three transparency commitments signed by fact-checkers and IFCN, this article compares the transparency of source, funds, and methodology of fact-checking news in six countries (the United States, the United Kingdom, India, South Africa, Brazil, and Australia) on six continents. The study found that South Africa and the United States are more transparent than other countries. Moreover, transparency is not only related to the social environment, but also related to the subject of verification and the news writing habits of each country. This article also compares the fact-checkers of the NGO model with the newsroom model and finds that the transparency of the fact-checkers of the NGO model is much higher than that of the newsroom model. Through these, this article broadens the perspective of global comparison of fact-checking, and explores the more complicated reasons behind the differences in the transparency of fact-checking across countries.","PeriodicalId":47909,"journal":{"name":"Journalism Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the Transparency of Fact-checking: A Global Perspective\",\"authors\":\"Qiong Ye\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17512786.2023.2211555\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In recent years, with the global proliferation of fake news, fact-checking has emerged globally, and transparency has become the consensus of global fact-checkers. Based on the three transparency commitments signed by fact-checkers and IFCN, this article compares the transparency of source, funds, and methodology of fact-checking news in six countries (the United States, the United Kingdom, India, South Africa, Brazil, and Australia) on six continents. The study found that South Africa and the United States are more transparent than other countries. Moreover, transparency is not only related to the social environment, but also related to the subject of verification and the news writing habits of each country. This article also compares the fact-checkers of the NGO model with the newsroom model and finds that the transparency of the fact-checkers of the NGO model is much higher than that of the newsroom model. Through these, this article broadens the perspective of global comparison of fact-checking, and explores the more complicated reasons behind the differences in the transparency of fact-checking across countries.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journalism Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journalism Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2023.2211555\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journalism Practice","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2023.2211555","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of the Transparency of Fact-checking: A Global Perspective
ABSTRACT In recent years, with the global proliferation of fake news, fact-checking has emerged globally, and transparency has become the consensus of global fact-checkers. Based on the three transparency commitments signed by fact-checkers and IFCN, this article compares the transparency of source, funds, and methodology of fact-checking news in six countries (the United States, the United Kingdom, India, South Africa, Brazil, and Australia) on six continents. The study found that South Africa and the United States are more transparent than other countries. Moreover, transparency is not only related to the social environment, but also related to the subject of verification and the news writing habits of each country. This article also compares the fact-checkers of the NGO model with the newsroom model and finds that the transparency of the fact-checkers of the NGO model is much higher than that of the newsroom model. Through these, this article broadens the perspective of global comparison of fact-checking, and explores the more complicated reasons behind the differences in the transparency of fact-checking across countries.
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
Journalism Practice
Journalism Practice COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
111
期刊介绍: ournalism Practice provides opportunities for reflective, critical and research-based studies focused on the professional practice of journalism. The emphasis on journalism practice does not imply any false or intellectually disabling disconnect between theory and practice, but simply an assertion that Journalism Practice’s primary concern is to analyse and explore issues of practice and professional relevance. Journalism Practice is an intellectually rigorous journal with all contributions being refereed anonymously by acknowledged international experts in the field. An intellectually lively, but professionally experienced, Editorial Board with a wide-ranging experience of journalism practice advises and supports the Editor. Journalism Practice is devoted to: the study and analysis of significant issues arising from journalism as a field of professional practice; relevant developments in journalism training and education, as well as the construction of a reflective curriculum for journalism; analysis of journalism practice across the distinctive but converging media platforms of magazines, newspapers, online, radio and television; and the provision of a public space for practice-led, scholarly contributions from journalists as well as academics. Journalism Practice’s ambitious scope includes: the history of journalism practice; the professional practice of journalism; journalism training and education; journalism practice and new technology; journalism practice and ethics; and journalism practice and policy.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信