推特上的趋势和事实检查叙事。诉讼骚乱中的验证码和假新闻(14-O)

IF 1.2 Q3 COMMUNICATION
Concha Pérez-Curiel, Ana Velasco-Molpeceres
{"title":"推特上的趋势和事实检查叙事。诉讼骚乱中的验证码和假新闻(14-O)","authors":"Concha Pérez-Curiel, Ana Velasco-Molpeceres","doi":"10.6035/2174-0992.2020.20.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a digital environment dominated by artificial intelligence, the influence of political leaders and audience activism, the emergence of misinformation and fake news define the agenda codes. A scenario in which the role of fact-checking agencies as propellers or detractors of the fake is also questioned. In a context defined by the continued general elections in Spain and the conflict of the independence of Catalonia, the Supreme Court Judgment on the trials of Proces (14-O) is known. A chain of citizen mobilizations floods the network. The general objective of the study is to know on Twitter the fake news about the Catalan riots, verification strategies and the level of impact and reaction of the public. We apply a triangular methodology of comparative content analysis and on a sample of tweets (n1=4500) we analyze the treatment of the hoaxes detected by the fact-checkers (n2=62). The results confirm that the authorship of the false news corresponds to accounts of individuals and that the strategies of fact-checking can favor the viralization more than the denial.","PeriodicalId":42897,"journal":{"name":"AdComunica-Revista Cientifica de Estrategias Tendencias e Innovacion en Communicacion","volume":"1 1","pages":"95-122"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tendencia y narrativas de fact-checking en Twitter. Códigos de verificación y fake news en los disturbios del Procés (14-O)\",\"authors\":\"Concha Pérez-Curiel, Ana Velasco-Molpeceres\",\"doi\":\"10.6035/2174-0992.2020.20.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In a digital environment dominated by artificial intelligence, the influence of political leaders and audience activism, the emergence of misinformation and fake news define the agenda codes. A scenario in which the role of fact-checking agencies as propellers or detractors of the fake is also questioned. In a context defined by the continued general elections in Spain and the conflict of the independence of Catalonia, the Supreme Court Judgment on the trials of Proces (14-O) is known. A chain of citizen mobilizations floods the network. The general objective of the study is to know on Twitter the fake news about the Catalan riots, verification strategies and the level of impact and reaction of the public. We apply a triangular methodology of comparative content analysis and on a sample of tweets (n1=4500) we analyze the treatment of the hoaxes detected by the fact-checkers (n2=62). The results confirm that the authorship of the false news corresponds to accounts of individuals and that the strategies of fact-checking can favor the viralization more than the denial.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42897,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AdComunica-Revista Cientifica de Estrategias Tendencias e Innovacion en Communicacion\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"95-122\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AdComunica-Revista Cientifica de Estrategias Tendencias e Innovacion en Communicacion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.6035/2174-0992.2020.20.5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AdComunica-Revista Cientifica de Estrategias Tendencias e Innovacion en Communicacion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6035/2174-0992.2020.20.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

在人工智能主导的数字环境中,政治领导人和观众激进主义的影响、错误信息和假新闻的出现定义了议程代码。事实核查机构作为造假者或诋毁者的作用也受到质疑。在西班牙持续大选和加泰罗尼亚独立冲突的背景下,最高法院对普罗塞斯(14-O)的审判作出了判决。一连串的公民动员充斥着网络。该研究的总体目标是了解推特上关于加泰罗尼亚骚乱的假新闻、验证策略以及公众的影响和反应程度。我们应用了比较内容分析的三角方法,并在推特样本(n1=4500)上分析了事实核查人员检测到的恶作剧的处理方式(n2=62)。结果证实,虚假新闻的作者与个人的描述相对应,事实核查策略更倾向于病毒化而非否认。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Tendencia y narrativas de fact-checking en Twitter. Códigos de verificación y fake news en los disturbios del Procés (14-O)
In a digital environment dominated by artificial intelligence, the influence of political leaders and audience activism, the emergence of misinformation and fake news define the agenda codes. A scenario in which the role of fact-checking agencies as propellers or detractors of the fake is also questioned. In a context defined by the continued general elections in Spain and the conflict of the independence of Catalonia, the Supreme Court Judgment on the trials of Proces (14-O) is known. A chain of citizen mobilizations floods the network. The general objective of the study is to know on Twitter the fake news about the Catalan riots, verification strategies and the level of impact and reaction of the public. We apply a triangular methodology of comparative content analysis and on a sample of tweets (n1=4500) we analyze the treatment of the hoaxes detected by the fact-checkers (n2=62). The results confirm that the authorship of the false news corresponds to accounts of individuals and that the strategies of fact-checking can favor the viralization more than the denial.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
16 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:481959085
Book学术官方微信