The Bearer of Fake News: The United Kingdom’s Solution to Fake News
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.
By Maggie Callahan
January 28, 2020
Fake news has become a term thrown at reliable and unreliable news alike. Ironically, the man who coined the term to discredit legitimate news sources, American President Donald Trump, won his election in large part due to the circulation of unreliable news sources and trolling perpetrated by Russian sources. The United Kingdom saw the potential for a similar outcome in their elections, and two non-profits, First Draft News and Full Fact, took action to ensure that fake news did not undermine the British democracy in the 2017 general elections.
These two non-profits work together to monitor and identify news items and sources and to verify those news items. They provide the public and news media with up-to-the-minute analysis and reports of their veracity. Not only do the organizations fact check traditional news outlets—they also verify content posted and shared widely on social media.
Although fake news finds its ancient predecessor in propaganda, which has nearly always been a part of human life, the rise of the internet and social media make the impacts of fake news more widespread and immediate. Fake news and false rumors reach more people, penetrate deeper into the social network and spread much faster than accurate stories. A false story spreads six times faster than its true counterpart.
False news is hard to define precisely, but the definition that First Draft News and Full Fact use indicates that fake news can take many forms. Fake news includes: false or misleading articles or headlines in traditional media; false news stories planted in social media feeds like Facebook and Twitter; internet, “Trolls,” or individuals who engage on different internet-based fora to create antagonistic dialogue as either robot or human; and fake news websites dedicated to false stories, often generating sensational stories to garner web traffic.
25 experts from these organizations were selected for their experience with social media trend analysis and fact-checking. The fact checkers come from a wide array of professions, spanning academics, economists, professional fact-checkers, legal experts and former Government Statistical Service workers on a temporary sabbatical from their government post. Both organizations do their fact checking in-house and require two separate individuals to review every claim and make published reports on its veracity.
The organizations ramped up their operations for the general elections, and for the 33 days leading up to the 2017 election, they worked tirelessly to verify the stories that were being shared most widely. Using Tendolizer, CrowdTangle, and Newswhip’s algorithms, the organizations were able to track and verify all items gaining traction on social media. On a daily basis, the organizations published two news letters to media organizations and the public on the veracity of the most popular news stories in mainstream and social media that related to the election, including stories regarding Brexit, employment, climate change, immigration, education, pensions and the National Health Service.
Through their analysis, the organizations realized that in the United Kingdom, citizens are overwhelmingly the bearer of fake news. Stories shared by citizens authored by hyper partisan news sites and political parties were the main sources of fake news, instead of bots or robots planting and sharing stories to increase traction. Training citizens on how to identify fake news and discredit its assertions is a critical first step in overcoming fake news and maintaining a healthy press and democracy.
To learn more about this case visit https://participedia.net/case/5114. To read about other innovative applications of public participation, visit www.participedia.net.
Author: Maggie Callahan is a master’s student of public diplomacy at Syracuse University and a graduate assistant for the Participedia Project at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. She holds a bachelor’s in political science and economics from Mercer University and has worked in Georgian, Moroccan and Nepalese nongovernmental organizations and the American government. Follow her on Twitter: @laissezmaggie
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...
The Bearer of Fake News: The United Kingdom’s Solution to Fake News
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.
By Maggie Callahan
January 28, 2020
Fake news has become a term thrown at reliable and unreliable news alike. Ironically, the man who coined the term to discredit legitimate news sources, American President Donald Trump, won his election in large part due to the circulation of unreliable news sources and trolling perpetrated by Russian sources. The United Kingdom saw the potential for a similar outcome in their elections, and two non-profits, First Draft News and Full Fact, took action to ensure that fake news did not undermine the British democracy in the 2017 general elections.
These two non-profits work together to monitor and identify news items and sources and to verify those news items. They provide the public and news media with up-to-the-minute analysis and reports of their veracity. Not only do the organizations fact check traditional news outlets—they also verify content posted and shared widely on social media.
Although fake news finds its ancient predecessor in propaganda, which has nearly always been a part of human life, the rise of the internet and social media make the impacts of fake news more widespread and immediate. Fake news and false rumors reach more people, penetrate deeper into the social network and spread much faster than accurate stories. A false story spreads six times faster than its true counterpart.
False news is hard to define precisely, but the definition that First Draft News and Full Fact use indicates that fake news can take many forms. Fake news includes: false or misleading articles or headlines in traditional media; false news stories planted in social media feeds like Facebook and Twitter; internet, “Trolls,” or individuals who engage on different internet-based fora to create antagonistic dialogue as either robot or human; and fake news websites dedicated to false stories, often generating sensational stories to garner web traffic.
25 experts from these organizations were selected for their experience with social media trend analysis and fact-checking. The fact checkers come from a wide array of professions, spanning academics, economists, professional fact-checkers, legal experts and former Government Statistical Service workers on a temporary sabbatical from their government post. Both organizations do their fact checking in-house and require two separate individuals to review every claim and make published reports on its veracity.
The organizations ramped up their operations for the general elections, and for the 33 days leading up to the 2017 election, they worked tirelessly to verify the stories that were being shared most widely. Using Tendolizer, CrowdTangle, and Newswhip’s algorithms, the organizations were able to track and verify all items gaining traction on social media. On a daily basis, the organizations published two news letters to media organizations and the public on the veracity of the most popular news stories in mainstream and social media that related to the election, including stories regarding Brexit, employment, climate change, immigration, education, pensions and the National Health Service.
Through their analysis, the organizations realized that in the United Kingdom, citizens are overwhelmingly the bearer of fake news. Stories shared by citizens authored by hyper partisan news sites and political parties were the main sources of fake news, instead of bots or robots planting and sharing stories to increase traction. Training citizens on how to identify fake news and discredit its assertions is a critical first step in overcoming fake news and maintaining a healthy press and democracy.
To learn more about this case visit https://participedia.net/case/5114. To read about other innovative applications of public participation, visit www.participedia.net.
Author: Maggie Callahan is a master’s student of public diplomacy at Syracuse University and a graduate assistant for the Participedia Project at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. She holds a bachelor’s in political science and economics from Mercer University and has worked in Georgian, Moroccan and Nepalese nongovernmental organizations and the American government. Follow her on Twitter: @laissezmaggie
Follow Us!