Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday June 05 2020, @12:03AM   Printer-friendly
from the orly? dept.

FiveThirtyEight is covering the efficacy of fact-checking and other methods to combat the spread of misinformation and disinformation. Fact-checking, after the fact, is better than nothing, it turns out. There are some common factors in the times when it has been done successfully:

Political scientists Ethan Porter and Thomas J. Wood conducted an exhaustive battery of surveys on fact-checking, across more than 10,000 participants and 13 studies that covered a range of political, economic and scientific topics. They found that 60 percent of respondents gave accurate answers when presented with a correction, while just 32 percent of respondents who were not given a correction expressed accurate beliefs. That’s pretty solid proof that fact-checking can work.

But Porter and Wood have found, alongside many other fact-checking researchers, some methods of fact-checking are more effective than others. Broadly speaking, the most effective fact checks have this in common:

  1. They are from highly credible sources (with extra credit for those that are also surprising, like Republicans contradicting other Republicans or Democrats contradicting other Democrats).
  2. They offer a new frame for thinking about the issue (that is, they don’t simply dismiss a claim as “wrong” or “unsubstantiated”).
  3. They don’t directly challenge one’s worldview and identity.
  4. They happen early, before a false narrative gains traction.

It is as much about psychology as actually rebutting the disinformation because factors like partisanship and worldview have strong effects, and it is hard to reach people inside their social control media echo chambers from an accurate source they will accept.

[Though often incorrectly attributed to Mark Twain, one is reminded of the adage: “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes”. --Ed.]

Previously:
(2020) Nearly Half of Twitter Accounts Pushing to Reopen America May be Bots
(2019) Russians Engaging in Ongoing 'Information Warfare,' FBI Director Says
(2019) How Fake News Spreads Like a Real Virus
(2019) More and More Countries are Mounting Disinformation Campaigns Online
(2019) At Defcon, Teaching Disinformation Campaigns Is Child's Play
(2018) Why You Stink at Fact-Checking
(2017) Americans Are “Under Siege” From Disinformation
(2015) Education Plus Ideology Exaggerates Rejection of Reality


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @01:51AM (4 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday June 05 2020, @01:51AM (#1003498)

    were US civilians to slip in a deep fascist mind-set

    then services like Twitter would become heavily regulated and/or state controlled - not good for profits or fun to work for.

    The whole thing about labeling Trump's tweet as potentially misleading is: they called him out - that's 99% of the action here, whatever they backed it up with doesn't matter, fact is: they called him out.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday June 05 2020, @02:37AM

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Friday June 05 2020, @02:37AM (#1003518) Journal

    I'm not saying "calling lies out" is bad, I'm saying "don't expect Twitter to do more than that".
    In the context of TFA, don't expect Twitter to apply all the measures that make "some methods of fact-checking... more effective than others" if that would increase their costs without increasing the consumer retention.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday June 06 2020, @08:50AM (2 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday June 06 2020, @08:50AM (#1004123) Journal

    then services like Twitter would become heavily regulated and/or state controlled - not good for profits or fun to work for.

    Not sure why you don't think that's good for profits. And "fun" is in the eye of the beholder.

    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:26PM (1 child)

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:26PM (#1004160)

      Not sure why you don't think that's good for profits.

      Not good for free-market derived profits - being a state controlled agency, taxpayer funded as it were, in the US and Europe at least, doesn't lead to lots of high salaries for the employees, and even defense contractors aren't unicorn level stellar performers on the stock markets.

      Now, some people do find working as a functionary in a bureaucracy "fun," just apply for Social Security benefits and you'll meet some, but I believe most people (normal people if you will) are more in line with Franz Kafka on that point.

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]
      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday June 06 2020, @04:49PM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday June 06 2020, @04:49PM (#1004236) Journal

        Not good for free-market derived profits

        There's other sorts of profits. And they tend to be bigger when the government is the party hooking you up.

        Now, some people do find working as a functionary in a bureaucracy "fun,"

        Exactly. Some people also like to be nosy, bullies, or finks. Those all have a place in a fascist business which is about controlling communication.