Social media has been transforming political communication dynamics for over a decade. Here using nearly a billion tweets, we analyse the change in Twitter’s news media landscape between the 2016 and 2020 US presidential elections. Using political bias and fact-checking tools, we measure the volume of politically biased content and the number of users propagating such information. We then identify influencers—users with the greatest ability to spread news in the Twitter network. We observe that the fraction of fake and extremely biased content declined between 2016 and 2020. However, results show increasing echo chamber behaviours and latent ideological polarization across the two elections at the user and influencer levels.
Truth of Varying Shades: On Political Fact-Checking and Fake News
We present an analytic study on the language of news media in the context of political fact-checking and fake news detection. We compare the language of real news with that of satire, hoaxes, and propaganda to find linguistic characteristics of untrustworthy text. To probe the feasibility of automatic political fact-checking, we also present a case study based on PolitiFact.com using their factuality judgments on a 6-point scale. Experiments show that while media fact-checking remains to be an open research question, stylistic cues can help determine the truthfulness of text.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1714566
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10074110
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract -
In recent years, the speed at which information disseminates has received an alarming boost from the pervasive usage of social media. To the detriment of political and social stability, this has also made it easier to quickly spread false claims. Due to the sheer volume of information, manual fact-checking seems infeasible, and as a result, computational approaches have been recently explored for automated fact-checking. In spite of the recent advancements in this direction, the critical step of recognizing and prioritizing statements worth fact-checking has received little attention. In this paper, we propose a hybrid approach that combines simple heuristics with supervised machine learning to identify claims made in political debates and speeches, and provide a mechanism to rank them in terms of their "check-worthiness". The viability of our method is demonstrated by evaluations on the English language dataset as part of the Check-worthiness task of the CLEF-2018 Fact Checking Lab.more » « less
-
Ideology is at the core of political science research. Yet, there still does not exist general-purpose tools to characterize and predict ideology across different genres of text. To this end, we study Pretrained Language Models using novel ideology-driven pretraining objectives that rely on the comparison of articles on the same story written by media of different ideologies. We further collect a large-scale dataset, consisting of more than 3.6M political news articles, for pretraining. Our model POLITICS outperforms strong baselines and the previous state-of-the-art models on ideology prediction and stance detection tasks. Further analyses show that POLITICS is especially good at understanding long or formally written texts, and is also robust in few-shot learning scenarios.more » « less
-
With the spread of the SARS-CoV-2, enormous amounts of information about the pandemic are disseminated through social media platforms such as Twitter. Social media posts often leverage the trust readers have in prestigious news agencies and cite news articles as a way of gaining credibility. Nevertheless, it is not always the case that the cited article supports the claim made in the social media post. We present a cross-genre ad hoc pipeline to identify whether the information in a Twitter post (i.e., a “Tweet”) is indeed supported by the cited news article. Our approach is empirically based on a corpus of over 46.86 million Tweets and is divided into two tasks: (i) development of models to detect Tweets containing claim and worth to be fact-checked and (ii) verifying whether the claims made in a Tweet are supported by the newswire article it cites. Unlike previous studies that detect unsubstantiated information by post hoc analysis of the patterns of propagation, we seek to identify reliable support (or the lack of it) before the misinformation begins to spread. We discover that nearly half of the Tweets (43.4%) are not factual and hence not worth checking – a significant filter, given the sheer volume of social media posts on a platform such as Twitter. Moreover, we find that among the Tweets that contain a seemingly factual claim while citing a news article as supporting evidence, at least 1% are not actually supported by the cited news, and are hence misleading.more » « less
-
more » « less
Identifying successful approaches for reducing the belief and spread of online misinformation is of great importance. Social media companies currently rely largely on professional fact-checking as their primary mechanism for identifying falsehoods. However, professional fact-checking has notable limitations regarding coverage and speed. In this article, we summarize research suggesting that the “wisdom of crowds” can be harnessed successfully to help identify misinformation at scale. Despite potential concerns about the abilities of laypeople to assess information quality, recent evidence demonstrates that aggregating judgments of groups of laypeople, or crowds, can effectively identify low-quality news sources and inaccurate news posts: Crowd ratings are strongly correlated with fact-checker ratings across a variety of studies using different designs, stimulus sets, and subject pools. We connect these experimental findings with recent attempts to deploy crowdsourced fact-checking in the field, and we close with recommendations and future directions for translating crowdsourced ratings into effective interventions.
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
