Politics of Disinformation. Группа авторов

Politics of Disinformation - Группа авторов


Скачать книгу
Ott, Brian L. Critical Studies in Media Communication 2017 128 32 Populism and social media: How politicians spread a fragmented ideology Engesser, Sven; Ernst, Nicole; Esser, Frank; Buechel, Florin Information Communication & Society 2017 125 31.3 In related news, that was wrong: The correction of misinformation through related stories functionality in social media Bode, Leticia; Vraga, Emily K. Journal of Communication 2015 92 15.3

      Bibliographic Analysis

      Politics, the Realm of Disinformation

General categories Matches %
Political Communication 163 37.6
Mass Communication 157 36.2
Journalism Studies 54 12.4
Health Communication 30 6.9
Ethnicity and Race in Communication 9 2.1
Interpersonal Communication 6 1.4
Philosophy, Theory, and Critique 5 1.2
Environmental Communication 4 0.9
Feminist Scholarship 2 0.5
Children, Adolescents, and Media 1 0.2
Information Systems 1 0.2
Organizational Communication 1 0.2
Public Relations 1 0.2

      The search for the causes and consequences of disinformation in the political sphere has been undertaken in numerous countries, but the majority of studies focus on the United States. Rojecki and Meraz (2016) are the authors of one of the pioneering studies on misinformation, in which they analyze facts, half-truths, and untruths during the presidential election of 2004; they conclude that by itself the web is not sufficient for spreading misinformation, but it can influence or set the agenda for traditional media. For the 2008 election, in which Obama confronted McCain, Weeks and Garrett carried out a national telephone survey to examine the consequences of inaccurate political rumors and found that believing rumors about an opposed candidate reinforced a vote for the preferred candidate (Weeks and Garrett 2014). In the 2012 election there was a tendency to analyze activity on Twitter, where Republicans evinced stronger outgroup negativity and hostility toward fact-checkers than Democrats (Shin and Thorson 2017). However, the scientific production that accompanied the 2016 presidential election was more fertile, because the disinformation order generated an unprecedented democratic disruption (Bennett and Livingston 2018). These strategies have made Trump a referent in studies on disinformation; he is mentioned in 200 articles, 45.9% of the sample.

      Apart from electoral periods, authoritarian countries (Stoycheff et al. 2016; Wang et al. 2020), referendums (Furman and Tunç 2019), and territorial conflicts such as those between Russia and Ukraine (Mejias and Vokuev 2017) or the independence of Catalonia (Del-Fresno-García and Manfredi-Sánchez 2018) have also given rise to waves of disinformation and relevant studies. Special mention is merited by comparative cross-national approaches, which have identified tendencies derived from exposure to disinformation in Africa as well (Wasserman and Madrid-Morales 2019), although the most extensive investigation was carried out by Humprecht et al. (2020), who empirically examined 18 Western democracies, which they catalogue according to their high or low resilience to online disinformation.


Скачать книгу