Polarization and Fake News

Vicario, Michela Del; Quattrociocchi, Walter; Scala, Antonio; Zollo, Fabiana

doi:10.1145/3316809

Cited by 199 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, on the one hand, we face the threats of a pandemic, which spreads in the absence of effective therapies and valid countermeasures and calls for major efforts to model and anticipate the time course of its diffusion 18 . On the other hand, we can speak of an infodemic threat 22 , which proliferates when credible information sources fail to capture the attention and trust of some parts of the public, for whom alternative, low-quality sources are more appealing as they capture more social attention 23 , better match their own beliefs or prejudices 24 , or sound more convincing, thanks to their typically straightforward messages 25 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the risks of ‘infodemics’ in response to COVID-19 epidemics

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the risks of ‘infodemics’ in response to COVID-19 epidemics

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This has implications for the spread of online disinformation, as the search for tribal approval may encourage people to broadcast content that reflects the views of the tribe, veracity notwithstanding. There is already evidence to suggest that online polarization and its resulting biases make online communities more susceptible to disinformation, often in the form of adversarial narratives (Vicario, Quattrociocchi, Scala, & Zollo, 2019). Another important factor to consider is the salience of political issues, particularly in relation to how the winners in a political contest can gain control of cultural narratives, which they can then leverage to benefit their group (Clark et al, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Battle for Britain: Analyzing Events as Drivers of Political Tribalism in Twitter Discussions of Brexit

North¹,

Piwek²,

Joinson³

2020

Policy & Internet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the aftermath of the 2016 referendum on European Union (EU) membership, Britain was divided into identity groups (or tribes) of Leavers and Remainers. In this study, we investigate how Brexit tribalism—in the form of outgroup derogation—has unfolded over time on Twitter. We analyze data from 32 months of discussions (n = 9,027,822), using identity‐based keywords as proxies for tribalism. First, we characterize the nature of the discussion by comparing language use patterns between tweets containing Brexiteer/Remainer and Brextremist/Remoaner keywords. We find that Brextremist/Remoaner are more commonly used in a derogatory way. We also find that all four group identity keywords are used more frequently over time, suggesting an increase in tribal interactions. Finally, we find evidence of a relationship between real‐life Brexit events and spikes in tribal responses online. These findings provide compelling insights into the extent of tribal political behavior on social media. They are significant for furthering our understanding of tribalism as a central feature of information warfare campaigns that aim to divide societies.

show abstract

“…To contrast misinformation, smoothing polarisation is therefore essential. To this end, users' behaviour may be used as a proxy to determine in advance the targets for hoaxes and fake news (Del Vicario et al, 2019). A timely identification of potential misinformation targets may allow the design of tailored counter-narratives and appropriate communication strategies.…”

Section: 6mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dealing with digital misinformation: a polarised context of narratives and tribes

Zollo

2019

EFS2

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The advent of the internet and social networks has revolutionised the information space and changed the way in which we communicate and get informed. On the internet, a huge amount of information competes for our (limited) attention. Moreover, despite the increasing quantity of contents, quality may be poor, making the environment particularly florid for misinformation spreading. In such a context, our cognitive biases emerge, first and foremost, confirmation bias, i.e. the human tendency to look for information that is already in agreement with one's system of beliefs. To shade light on the phenomenon, we present a collection of works investigating how information gets consumed and shapes communities on Facebook. We find that confirmation bias plays a crucial role in content selection and diffusion, and we provide empirical evidence of the existence of echo chambers, i.e. well separated and polarised groups of like-minded users sharing a same narrative. Immersed in these bubbles, users keep framing and reinforcing their world view, ignoring information dissenting from their preferred narrative. In this scenario, corrections in the form of fact-checking or debunking attempts seem to fail and have instead a backfire effect. To contrast misinformation, smoothing polarisation is so essential, and may require the design of tailored counter-narratives and appropriate communication strategies, particularly for sensitive topics.

show abstract

Polarization and Fake News

Cited by 199 publications

References 51 publications

Assessing the risks of ‘infodemics’ in response to COVID-19 epidemics

Assessing the risks of ‘infodemics’ in response to COVID-19 epidemics

Battle for Britain: Analyzing Events as Drivers of Political Tribalism in Twitter Discussions of Brexit

Dealing with digital misinformation: a polarised context of narratives and tribes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About