.

Чтение книги онлайн.

Читать онлайн книгу - страница 7

Автор:
Жанр:
Серия:
Издательство:
 -

Скачать книгу

(19 March 2018). doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3144139.

      9 Wagner, C.and Boczkowski, P.(2019). The reception of fake news: the interpretations and practices that shape the consumption of perceived misinformation. Digital Journalism 7 (7): 870–885.

Part I Theoretical Approaches to Disinformation

       Nereida Cea, Bella Palomo

      University of Málaga,Spain

      Introduction

      The experts predict that in 2022 the citizens of developed countries will be consuming more disinformation than genuine news, because lies are 70% more likely to go viral and be retweeted in comparison with verified information (Vosoughi et al. 2018). It is estimated that 115 fabricated stories favoring Donald Trump were shared on Facebook a total of 30 million times during the 2016 US presidential election (Allcott and Gentzkow 2017). This figure confirms the impact attained by isolated content, disseminated on alternative rather than traditional news channels. This is shaping a dangerous news diet that can generate distrust toward the media and damage the democratic quality of society by encouraging civic apathy, destabilization, chaos (Waisbord 2018), a reduction of pluralism, and a strengthening of polarized communities in which fake news and conspiracy theories are freely propagated. Specialized approaches also warn of a decline of scientific culture in the age of fake news, threatening the scientific and economic progress of Western countries (Elías 2019).

      Audiences are conscious of the ambiguity, lack of control, and weakness that accompany the hybrid media system in which such practices have come to maturity. This is why one of their main concerns is the manipulation of journalistic news stories to serve political or economic interests, as the Reuters Institute Digital News Report testified in 2018. This panorama explains why disinformation has become the principal challenge and concern in communication in the twenty-first century, and why its transmedia and cross-border dimension requires public policies and specific training in order to limit its spread.

      Mapping recent developments in the scholarship on fake news and misinformation has previously been undertaken in the sphere of health (Wang et al. 2019), selectively in the area of communication (Jankowski 2018; Tandoc et al. 2018), and by applying an interdisciplinary approach that involved disciplines like psychology, economics, and political science as well as communication (Ha et al. 2019), analyzing investigations registered on the databases of Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Pubmed. The novelty of the present chapter lies in the breadth of the sample used, since previous review articles had examined between 2 and 142 journal articles.

      Methodological Approach

      Forty years after the publication of the first articles indexed in Web of Science related to disinformation, it seems timely to construct an x-ray of its presence in academic research in order to objectively set out the scope achieved. To this end a mixed methodology is applied, which combines bibliographical with bibliometric analysis to gather qualitative and quantitative data, enabling the volume and impact of scientific publications to be measured.

      This chapter therefore aims to analyze the scientific production on disinformation issues published in journals indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS) without any temporal restriction, that is, from 1900 until August 2020. The sample was put together on the basis of articles housed in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) database, which is the most relevant and pertinent index for the area of Communication. Following the analysis of the conceptual articles related to disinformation (Wardle 2017, 2018; Tandoc et al. 2018), a list of terms used for the consultation was designed. The following search string was applied:

      (disinformation* OR misinformation* OR “misleading information*” OR “manipulated new*” OR “fake new*” OR “fact* check*” OR “false content*” OR “false new*” OR “post-truth” OR “verification tool*” OR “verif* process*” OR “information* disorder*” OR “hybrid media system”).

      This search was conducted on the titles, abstracts, and keywords of the articles published by all SSCI publications, without considering book reviews or proceedings. Initially, 536 references were localized in the general category of Social Sciences, and this list was subjected to a bibliometric analysis referring to the following indicators: temporal evolution, authorship, affiliation, language, country of production, journal, and most-cited articles.

      The following pages present a chronological evolution of the interest that disinformation has aroused in the academic sphere, which journals have provided more extensive coverage, the most productive geographical areas, the most-cited works, the most outstanding authors and their affiliations, the co-authorships generated, the approaches addressed, and the methodologies employed in these investigations.

      Results

      Bibliometric Analysis

      Figure 1.1 Evolution of the use of “disinformation,” “fake news,” “misinformation,” “fact check,” and “post-truth” in articles indexed in WoS (1980–2020a).

Скачать книгу