An official website of the United States government
Analyzing ideology and polarization is of critical importance in advancing our grasp of modern politics. Recent research has made great strides towards understanding the ideological bias (i.e., stance) of news media along the left-right spectrum. In this work, we instead take a novel and more nuanced approach for the study of ideology based on its left or right positions on the issue being discussed. Aligned with the theoretical accounts in political science, we treat ideology as a multi-dimensional construct, and introduce the first diachronic dataset of news articles whose ideological positions are annotated by trained political scientists and linguists at the paragraph level. We showcase that, by controlling for the author{'}s stance, our method allows for the quantitative and temporal measurement and analysis of polarization as a multidimensional ideological distance. We further present baseline models for ideology prediction, outlining a challenging task distinct from stance detection.
more »
« less
Intermedia Agenda Setting during the 2016 and 2020 U.S. Presidential Elections
Intermedia agenda setting (IAS) theory suggests that different news sources can influence each other's agenda. While this theory has been well-established in existing literature, whether it still holds in today's high-choice media environment, which includes news producers of different credibility and ideology dispositions, is an open question. Through two case studies--the 2016 and 2020 U.S. presidential elections--we show that media are still largely aligned, especially in broad topics they choose to cover, and that the level of alignment along the credibility dimension is comparable to that along the ideology dimension. Furthermore, we find that the coverage of the Republican candidate is better aligned across different media types than that of the Democratic candidate, and that media divergence has increased along both dimensions from 2016 to 2020. Finally, we demonstrate that high-credibility media still plays a dominant role in the IAS process, yet with a cautious warning of its declining IAS power for the Democratic candidate over the course of four years.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2045432
- PAR ID:
- 10519020
- Publisher / Repository:
- AAAI
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
- Volume:
- 18
- ISSN:
- 2162-3449
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 254 to 275
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Struggling to curb misinformation, social media platforms are experimenting with design interventions to enhance consumption of credible news on their platforms. Some of these interventions, such as the use of warning messages, are examples of nudges---a choice-preserving technique to steer behavior. Despite their application, we do not know whether nudges could steer people into making conscious news credibility judgments online and if they do, under what constraints. To answer, we combine nudge techniques with heuristic based information processing to design NudgeCred--a browser extension for Twitter. NudgeCred directs users' attention to two design cues: authority of a source and other users' collective opinion on a report by activating three design nudges---Reliable, Questionable, and Unreliable, each denoting particular levels of credibility for news tweets. In a controlled experiment, we found that NudgeCred significantly helped users (n=430) distinguish news tweets' credibility, unrestricted by three behavioral confounds---political ideology, political cynicism, and media skepticism. A five-day field deployment with twelve participants revealed that NudgeCred improved their recognition of news items and attention towards all of our nudges, particularly towards Questionable. Among other considerations, participants proposed that designers should incorporate heuristics that users' would trust. Our work informs nudge-based system design approaches for online media.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Concerns about the spread of misinformation online via news articles have led to the development of many tools and processes involving human annotation of their credibility. However, much is still unknown about how different people judge news credibility or the quality or reliability of news credibility ratings from populations of varying expertise. In this work, we consider credibility ratings from two “crowd” populations: 1) students within journalism or media programs, and 2) crowd workers on UpWork, and compare them with the ratings of two sets of experts: journalists and climate scientists, on a set of 50 climate-science articles. We find that both groups’ credibility ratings have higher correlation to journalism experts compared to the science experts, with 10-15 raters to achieve convergence. We also find that raters’ gender and political leaning impact their ratings. Among article genre of news/opinion/analysis and article source leaning of left/center/right, crowd ratings were more similar to experts respectively with opinion and strong left sources.more » « less
-
Concerns about the spread of misinformation online via news articles have led to the development of many tools and processes involving human annotation of their credibility. However, much is still unknown about how different people judge news credibility or the quality or reliability of news credibility ratings from populations of varying expertise. In this work, we consider credibility ratings from two “crowd” populations: 1) students within journalism or media programs, and 2) crowd workers on UpWork, and compare them with the ratings of two sets of experts: journalists and climate scientists, on a set of 50 climate-science articles. We find that both groups’ credibility ratings have higher correlation to journalism experts compared to the science experts, with 10-15 raters to achieve convergence. We also find that raters’ gender and political leaning impact their ratings. Among article genre of news/opinion/analysis and article source leaning of left/center/right, crowd ratings were more similar to experts respectively with opinion and strong left sources.more » « less
-
News media is expected to uphold unbiased reporting. Yet they may still affect public opinion by selectively including or omitting events that support or contradict their ideological positions. Prior work in NLP has only studied media bias via linguistic style and word usage. In this paper, we study to which degree media balances news reporting and affects consumers through event inclusion or omission. We first introduce the task of detecting both partisan and counter- partisan events: events that support or oppose the author’s political ideology. To conduct our study, we annotate a high-quality dataset, PAC, containing 8 , 511 (counter-)partisan event annotations in 304 news articles from ideologically diverse media outlets. We benchmark PAC to highlight the challenges of this task. Our findings highlight both the ways in which the news subtly shapes opinion and the need for large language models that better understand events within a broader context. Our dataset can be found at https://github.com/ launchnlp/Partisan-Event-Dataset.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v18i1.31312
