Many find it difficult to distinguish between credible and misleading content in today’s digital age. With the rise of social media, false and misleading information has become more prevalent, making it even more difficult for people to tell the difference between fact and fiction.

It’s the job of the journalist to try to find and present the truth, but fact-checking isn’t easy. It requires a methodological approach to verification.

Because many media outlets are profit-driven, sensationalist and clickbait content frequently takes precedence over fact-based journalism. As a result, trust in journalism as a whole has declined, while, at the same time, skepticism about the reliability of information published and shared has grown.

The preference of social media platforms for engagement and amplification has contributed to the information disorder. Indeed, credible and evidence-based information is in short supply, while false and misleading content continues to spread on social media.

Because of this it is critical to have a strong fact-checking system in place to combat the spread of false and misleading information.

A fact-checker must be skilled at digital investigation and willing to go the extra mile to uncover a kernel of truth. To assess the veracity of information accurately, fact-checkers must be trained in and have access to digital tools, techniques, and resources.

Fact-checking in action

At Nepal Check, we use both human intelligence and digital tools to verify information spreading online. Over the past six months, we have fact-checked a wide range of false claims, from political statements to health misinformation.

On the eve of the November 20 2022 elections in Nepal, we fact-checked screenshots purported to be from a secret circular issued by the ruling Nepali Congress urging its supporters not to vote for Maoist candidates.

Not only was the so-called “secret circular” made up. Election misinformation spreaders created screenshots of ‘news’ that claimed to have been published by reputable digital outlets and a newspaper in Nepal.

We dug deep into the misinformation spreaders to find out what party they were affiliated with. We found that the majority were affiliated with an opposition party that competed with the ruling alliance.

One of the fake news reports had a reporter’s byline. The claim was refuted by the reporter himself. In the fact-check, Nepal Check cited him. We also cited news outlets that claimed the screenshots were fake. In addition to relying on their statement, we checked the claims on news websites.

Finally, our investigation revealed that the Nepali Congress party’s Central Working Committee had not met in nearly three months when the meeting was claimed. We also used the occasion to explain how morphed screenshots are created. In doing so, we hoped to raise awareness about the technique so that people would think twice before spreading false information.

We fact-checked videos with false claims that Gagan Thapa, the general secretary of the Nepali Congress, promised freebies if elected prime minister. Thapa is a popular politician and is often the target of misinformation. The video claiming Thapa promised free smartphones, free petrol and a monthly stipend for the elderly had circulated on social media for several months.

To debunk the claim, we needed to find the original, full version of the video. So we started by looking up the video on YouTube. We discovered a video of the political function, but it lacked the section where Thapa was quoted. However, the video provided an important clue that a fact-checker can use to conduct additional research. It displayed the event’s date and location.

With this vital information, we were able to locate the event organizer’s Facebook page. A further Google search led us to the full version of the video, which had been published by a local television station. We found that Thapa’s statement had been taken out of context in order to spread misinformation.

Thapa had argued that while populist programs receive widespread support, they are difficult to fund. To disseminate misinformation, the video, which was more than an hour long, was edited down to a 22-second clip. We could verify this by following the claim back to its source, which is an important aspect of combating misinformation.

Human intelligence and engaging the audience

While the digital age creates opportunities for the spread of fake news, misinformation and disinformation, it also creates opportunities for fact checkers to follow digital trails in order to try to find the source and the veracity of the information being shared.

The fundamental journalistic skills of fact-checking are not new, they just need applying to the digital age. Our duty, as always, is to publish accurate, fair, objective, impartial and well-sourced information, backed by well-researched context and analysis. That has not changed. And digital tools are a massive help in the pursuit of robust and critical journalism. We just need to make sure we are using those tools as well as those who propagate falsehoods do.

All newsrooms must have a fact-checking team made up of dedicated journalists who are skilled in thorough research and diligent scrutiny in order to ensure that all information shared is a true representation of news events.

Below is a list of some of the tools Nepal Check uses, and how we use them.

Human intelligence

• Research who is behind the information being spread, try to find a trail of similar information to lead you to the source.
• Does the fake news item carry a byline? Does that person exist? If they do contact them. By doing so you might find a new lead in your search for the truth.
• Does what is being said stand up to historical scrutiny? Research and establish the sequence of events leading up to the claims.

Digital tools

• Is the evidence real or manipulated or used out of context?
• Are screenshots real or fake, can you find any evidence of the original material online or in print? If not, why not? Who could have created the screenshots and why?
• Is video being used? Has a clip been taken out of context? As a journalist you have a duty to search for the original, watch it in its entirety, and offer a more complete picture including the situation and circumstances in which it was shot in order to add context and relevance.
• When you find the original you will also discover the date and, possibly, the location of the original material. Do these match the details in the clip?
• Check all social media links back to the original source to find out what other material has been shared.

Engaging your audience

• Be totally transparent in your myth-busting research.
• Let those who read your journalism know the steps you took and the evidence you uncovered.
• By doing so you will help them understand more about fake news and empower them with the tools to do their own fact-checking.

The post Creating a strong fact-checking system first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Fake news is not new, it’s been around for thousands of years. Throughout history there have always been attempts to fool and confuse the public and distract attention from the truth. However, in recent years disinformation has become much more widespread, and it constitutes a direct challenge to honest, truthful reporting. So what should journalists do about it?

Fojo Media Institute has an excellent free resource called Fojo Check containing tools for journalists wanting to brush up their skills in fact-checking.

Annelie Frank, the project manager for Fojo’s fact-checking hub Faktajouren says many know about fake news’, but not many understand what it is.

“It’s not news, because news tells us what’s really happened even if mistakes occasionally are made. I don’t think a lot of people fall for fake news on fake news sites nowadays. The public has been educated on source criticism and on how the media works. The former US president has practically kidnapped the term with his attacks on traditional media. Fake news is not the big problem. But disinformation is a greater threat. These kinds of stories contain quite a lot of truth. A government decision can be described correctly, but relevant information will be left out and thereby the big picture is muddled.”

We spoke to a range of experts involved in training journalists, and we asked them how to spot fake news and deal with it. Responses listed alphabetically.

Associate Professor Dr. Dinh Thi Thuy Hang – Director, Center for Further Training of Professional Journalists (VJTC), Vietnam Journalists Association (VJA)

“In 2021 the VJTC conducted five training workshops for journalists in identifying and checking fake news, disinformation and misinformation.

“Fake news often appears on social networks. They have catchy and often shocking headlines to attract attention. As an internet user, I often read through the information, then look at the link (URL).

“Misinformation often comes from fake news websites which are created to appear almost identical to the original websites.

“When in doubt I cross check the date and the event to see if the information is published on other newspapers or news sites. If the news is discussed by other sources, such as mainstream newspapers, there’s a high chance that news is true. However, for journalists, they still need to verify the information with sources to gather evidence in order to confirm that the news is accurate.

“When I find misinformation being spread, I often post on my family’s and friend’s groups on social media to tell them that the information being shared is fake and that they shouldn’t believe it or circulate it. However some people still circulate misinformation even though they are suspicious of the information being shared via social media links.”

Sanjoy Hazarika is a former reporter for the New York Times, author and documentary filmmaker. He is co-convenor of the South Asia Media Defenders Network (SAMDEN) and currently Director of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI). He is the founder of the Centre for North East Studies and Policy Research (C-NES).

“I encourage journalists to access well-known resources and organizations which flag, challenge and disseminate information about fake news and their media handles. Every major country has a few dedicated persons focusing on these critical issues. In addition, the answer to fake news is to place the facts on any issue in the public domain.

“Another way — slower than getting a news break from a reliable source but reliable — is to use freedom of information/right to information laws which exist in many parts of the world.

“Journalists have won national and international awards by anchoring their reporting about key government issues of public concern on right to information (RTI) requests. RTI has become an important tool for media to investigate official wrongdoing. The facts can’t be disputed because they come from the original source: the relevant government department.”

Naomi Goldsmith – journalism trainer and media consultant

“I personally think there is no such thing as ‘fake news’. If the information is fake, then it’s not news.

“News, of course, should always be accurate, and where there is uncertainty or controversy – this should be made clear.

“There are people who knowingly or mistakenly create or pass on information which is not accurate, and this can more precisely be referred to as disinformation and misinformation.

“Disinformation – like dishonest – means it’s deliberately false. Misinformation – like mistake – means there wasn’t a deliberate intention to create or pass on false or misleading information. It was a mistake.”

(Naomi has written a longer piece for this site about dealing with disinformation and misinformation).

Jaldeep Katwala – writer and journalist

“Look at the source. Is it an organisation you trust? If the information comes to you via social media from a friend of a friend or someone you vaguely know, be particularly suspicious.

“Does it sound credible? Are the sources quoted recognised and traceable?

“Beware of opinions masquerading as facts. Always ask what is this person’s perspective and ask if they are trying to support an outrageous statement with partial or unlikely facts.

“Journalists are gatekeepers of information. We check the validity of what we are told and then share it with the audience once we are sure it is accurate, honest and truthful.

“Sometimes journalists fail in this regard, so information published by other news outlets also needs to be tested.

“If you’re not sure that information is correct don’t pass it on. Be subjective but don’t be obsessive.

“In your work as a news gatherer be sure to cast your eyes and ears widely in an attempt to include multiple perspectives. Don’t limit yourself to a personal echo chamber cut off from the real world and other points of view.

“Keep an open mind, listen to diverse opinions, and always check and double check all the information you come across before passing it on to those who turn to you for reliable information.”

Richard Sambrook – Emeritus Professor of Journalism at Cardiff University

“Fake news is a phrase used to cover many different sorts of problems – and sometimes used to undermine legitimate journalism. Basically there is misinformation – information which is unintentionally wrong and simply needs correcting – and disinformation, which is deliberately wrong and intended to mislead.

“The problem of disinformation isn’t going to go away. The tools of disinformation are getting more sophisticated. For example, artificial intelligence can now manipulate audio and video to make it appear people have said things they have not said.

“So how can you spot Fake News? Ask some basic questions:

• Who is saying this? Is the source clear and are they who they say they are (e.g. is the website url genuine?)
• Where are other voices, views and sources on this topic? If there are none – be suspicious.
• Why are they saying this? Is it to inform? persuade? entertain? educate? Or might it be to mislead?
• When was this said? Is it contemporary or is it a picture or quote taken out of context from the past to mislead about a current issue?

“When misinformation or disinformation is found, it needs to be corrected. But that alone may not be enough. In the end, serious journalists need to commit to high standards of accuracy, fairness, providing evidence, reporting a range of views and being open about their purpose and accountable if mistakes get made. Openness and transparency are the best means of winning trust.

“Understanding fake news and verification techniques are built into core journalism modules at Cardiff University.”

The post How to identify and deal with fake news first appeared on Media Helping Media.

I personally think there is no such thing as “fake news.” If the information is fake, then it’s not news.

News, of course, should always be accurate, and where there is uncertainty or controversy – this should be made clear.

There are people who knowingly or mistakenly create or pass on information which is not accurate, and this can more precisely be referred to as “disinformation” and “misinformation.”

• Disinformation – like dishonest – means it’s deliberately false.
• Misinformation – like mistake – means there wasn’t a deliberate intention to create or pass on false or misleading information. It was a mistake.

Motivation

It is worth considering why someone would want to create disinformation. This will help you identify it. You need to understand their motivation. It could be:

• Financial or commercial gain
• Ambition or power
• A belief, faith or allegiance which overrides reason and facts
• A desire to cause trouble or disruption

Ask yourself what the creator of the content stands to gain by sharing the information.

Will they financially benefit? Are they trying to discredit a competitor or political rival? Are they a fervent believer of a certain way of thinking and trying to persuade others to share their views? Are they trying to frighten people or cause confusion with their content?

People who are trying to entertain or amuse others – usually make clear that their content is a parody or satire – but not always.

Use your common sense.

If the content is making a claim of commercial gain or large profits – investigate further.

If the content contains accusations of wrongdoing against a named individual or organisation – where is the evidence and the right to reply?

Headlines and introductions which promise to reveal something previously unknown or which play on your emotions – need to be treated cautiously.

Of course, a talented journalist knows how to write a headline which arouses an audience’s curiosity but they also deliver on what they promise in the body of the story.

Misinformation may have occurred because the information or pictures were believed and/or weren’t checked thoroughly before being published.

To identify misinformation it is important to check back, step by step to the original source of the information – this technique of investigating is called the Trust Chain.

Dealing with misinformation or disinformation?

If the content has been published on a mainstream media outlet – then you can inform the editorial team.

If it has been published on a social media platform it can also be reported to their moderators.

In some countries, social media companies are regulated by a government-approved regulatory body – you could also complain to them.

However, be careful about getting into an argument with individual commentators who are peddling false information as this can drive traffic to their accounts and websites and increase their exposure and even add to the revenue they receive.

There are many media literacy websites which offer advice on how to deal with misinformation and disinformation.

The International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) sets a code of ethics for fact-checking organisations. The IFCN reviews fact-checkers for compliance with its code and issues a certification to publishers who pass the audit.

The certification lasts for one year, and fact-checkers must be re-examined annually to retain their certifications. It is part of the Poynter organisation.

Check that the fact-checker you use is verified by the International Fact-Checking Network.

The post Dealing with disinformation and misinformation first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Spotting fake news through good practice

Here we discuss fake news or false news. We look at what these terms mean for journalists and the different kinds of fake news that exist. Then we offer guidance on how journalists can fight fake or false news through good practice and the use of ‘Trust Chains’.

Fake news

Fake news or false news can mean one of two things. It can be either:

1. a made-up, untrue story or invented “fact” that has been written or presented to seem genuine, or
2. an accusation that a genuine news story or actual fact is false, in order to undermine it.

Made-up news or facts (meaning 1 above) have been around for centuries. Although there are some rare exceptions when it is permissible to make up so-called “news” – for example in comedy or fiction – overall, false news is wrong and should not be produced by ethical journalists.

The second meaning (2) was made fashionable more recently by US President Donald Trump to describe news stories he disliked, usually because they criticised him. Although Trump started the current popularity of this meaning, many other people now use it, mainly people with power who dislike what professional journalists say about them.

For a full description of the controversy over fake news, you can read this article in TheNewsManual … Now!

Fake news has been around since mankind first started communicating and for hundreds of thousands of years it existed amongst a mixture of myths, legends and provable facts.

What we might recognise today as news only started in western societies a few centuries ago, and then in things like political pamphlets pushing a particular ideology or view of the world. Today’s tradition of objective journalism is actually quite modern.

Objective journalism produces stories based on provable facts, supported by evidence, accurately relayed and representing all aspects of any controversy without bias.

This definition of news is the one used in modern democratic, free-speech journalism, of the type supported by The News Manual. You can read more in several chapters, especially Chapter 56 ‘Facts and Opinions’ in Volume III, Ethics and the Law.

Different kinds of fake news

There are many kinds of fake or false news and many different reasons why it is produced.

In a 2018 UNESCO report titled “Journalism, ‘fake news’ and disinformation”, (download the PDF of the report here, or go to the bottom of the page where it is embedded) the editors identified three specific types they called misinformation, disinformation and ma-linformation. In practice they break down into four types, with increasing levels of wrongdoing:

Genuine errors

At the lower end of the spectrum there is news that is wrong because of mistakes, carelessness, genuine misunderstanding or because the person generating the news or passing it on is not really good at it. This type of “fake news” has always existed and we generally forgive those responsible as “only human”.

Satire

One level down on the scale of harm is news presented as satire – or satire presented as news.

This is made-up news printed or broadcast in such a way that it is obvious to readers and viewers that it is not true, just a joke.

It is a tradition in many cultures for media to publish such stories on 1 April each year, ‘April Fools Day’. Usually no harm is done and the media organisation commonly identifies the story afterwards or leaves clues within the story showing it is made up.

But not everybody sees satire as harmless and people can be very offended when they think they are being fooled or made fun off.

Half-truths

Thirdly there is the kind of disinformation that takes real, provable facts and twists them, usually by selectively quoting some parts but not others. People usually do this to support their own belief system or a specific argument. Some of the news and opinion pieces to do with man-made global warming often fit into this category. It is not good practice, but many people regard it as part of politics.

Manufactured news

The most harmful kind of “fake news” is made up or manufactured in order to deceive, in such a way that it calls black white, it turns the truth on its head and maybe presents concocted evidence.

This seems like real news and is the most damaging kind of false news. Repeated often and long enough, this maliciously manufactured “fake news” not only damages the kind of rational discussion necessary for the functioning of democracy, but it leaves readers, listeners and viewers wondering just what they can believe, if anything at all.

It is very rare for such stories to be produced by most reputable media outlets, partly because journalists are trained to be cynical and check facts – there are usually systems of sub-editors and fact-checkers in place to assist – and because the publishers and broadcasters know that their readership and audience numbers depend on people coming back to them for news they can trust.

Social media and fake news

Social media have been blamed for spreading fake or false news. Indeed, surveys up to 2019 generally show that social media were the most mistrusted of all the modern media.

Social media such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and SnapChat are far less trusted than traditional print and broadcasting – what we call “legacy media”. Social media have some very useful functions in the 21st Century, sharing experiences, connecting families and friends, warning of danger so fast even the emergency services use them. They are generally beneficial and here to stay.

But social media are not so good in the production and transmission of news. In some ways they have actually caused the current plague of fake news. The very things that make social media so popular also make them so dangerous in spreading fake news. Anybody can use them, they are instant and there are few controls over content or quality standards.

Social media also play a major role in the “amplification” of false news. One person sharing something with ten people who each share it with 10 more can quickly spread fake news to thousands or millions of people. That is why information or accusations on social media are said to go “viral”, i.e. like a virus in a one’s body.

What also makes fake news so powerful is that it resembles an extreme form of what makes real news, in that it is typically very unusual. Because it is wrong, it is not what people expect so they pass it on as news. The truth – which might be much more ordinary – is not so attractive and is therefore not shared as widely or as quickly.

The journal Science has published research that shows that false news on Twitter spreads faster to more people than the truth.

As the 18th Century Anglo-Irish intellectual Jonathan Swift wrote: “Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it”.

Trust chains

One of the main weapons against fake news, for both journalists and their audiences alike, is the Trust Chain.

A Trust Chain is what connects the source of an event – including speeches, interviews etc – with the final reader, viewer or listener, ensuring that the version of facts they receive remains true to the original.

Each time a fact or comment is passed on by someone in the chain, it is a new link that must be checked to make sure it comes from a reliable source who has already checked its accuracy.

The steps to creating and maintaining Trust Chains are simple and should be followed at all times.

Be honest with yourself, about yourself

We should always try to be honest with ourselves and with other people. If we don’t know if something is true, then we should not say it is, even when the admission strikes at the very heart of our own personal worldview.

Journalists are also members of society, so are able to have personal opinions of their own. But these must never be allowed to influence our professional work, however hard that might be. Remember to separate the you-at-work from the you-at-home.

Pass news forward honestly

Again, whatever you write or broadcast, you must be truthful with your reader, listener or viewer.

If you do not know something is true, then either you must not pass it on or you must admit its weakness to your audience. If you cannot confirm that a story or a fact is true yourself, then you must say how accurate – or possibly inaccurate – you are being.

If you know something that is widely known but has not been confirmed, explain that. For example:

It is widely believed that the Prime Minister will announce a new trade agreement with France this afternoon, though no-one in Government will confirm this and the French Embassy has said it is “unlikely”.

Journalists should wherever possible attribute facts or opinions about which there may be dispute.

Question doubtful information

Journalists are more than people who pass on information to their audiences. Anyone can do that, but journalists add value through their work by sorting through lots of information to pick out what is newsworthy, then check its truthfulness or accuracy before communicating it in a news item or current affairs story.

Journalists are a bit like food tasters, deciding what is good and what is not so good or actually bad.

At first this requires a lot of effort, and you will make mistakes. But after a few years your sense of taste – in our case “newsworthiness” – becomes more highly trained and we may even develop a “sixth sense” about information we find or are given.

Be alert to that sixth sense, listen to that voice that asks yourself: “Does this really sound right?”

That little voice is not the answer, but it is an alarm you should listen to. If your sense tells you something is wrong about a piece of information, check it out with greater care than normal. Often you will be right in doing so.

When someone tells us something that sounds even remotely doubtful, ask them: “Who says?” or “How do you know?” Said properly, it doesn’t need to be rude.

Track suspect information back to its source

The Truth Chain for any news story has a beginning and an end. Unless the journalist witnessed the start themselves, they will usually become part of that process part-way along the chain. If so, they must always think about where the story started. Who first discovered the information? Who first passed it on? Who else has played a role in transmitting?

There is a children’s game in most cultures that relies on people in a line passing on a simple message to the next person until it gets to the last person in the line.

The fun in the game is to see how very different even a simple message becomes by being repeated before it reaches the last person.

Journalists cannot afford to play such games. We must try to ensure that the message at the end is the same as it was at the beginning. That will often mean going back and asking people before you in the chain to check the accuracy and truth of it, before you yourself pass it on. As you can see, this is not done for laughs; for journalists, getting the truth right is a serious business.

Distinguish facts from opinions

Suffice it to say here that the strength of the Trust Chain relies on both (a) knowing the difference and (b) telling your readers, listeners or viewers what each element of your news story is – fact or opinion?

Some facts are so clear or so well-documented they can be relayed without attributing them to a source. But any facts that are controversial, contested or less-known and ALL opinions must be attributed.

You can learn more about attribution in the News Manual’s Chapter 9 and about sources in Chapter 59.

Find trusted, tested news sources

As a journalist, you are largely reliant on other people telling you things, so try to find and follow people you know you can trust.

If you work for a professional news outlet, it will have a list of other news organisations – such as news agencies – that provide reliable information which is so vital for a strong Trust Chain.

Be aware that you cannot simply ignore your “sixth sense” if it tells you that something from one of your reliable sources seems doubtful. Check out all information that seems questionable, even if it comes from a previously trustworthy source.

Check against other professional media

Do not rely on one source for any information you receive that is even slightly doubtful or controversial. Check on multiple sources. Of course, they may all be wrong, but you lessen the chances of making a mistake if you search for good, accurate information as widely as practicable.

Most respectable professional news organisations have a “two-source rule”, meaning they must find at least two reliable and independent sources before they publish or broadcast something important.

Do not rely on the Internet

The Internet is just a means of moving information around – it is not a guarantee that information is reliable in any way. Websites are no more or less reliable that a social media feed, blog, tweet or post. What matters is the reliability of the people or the organisation behind the website.

As we have seen from the creation of “fake news”, there are hundreds of thousands of people around the world creating fake news, either for their own amusement or because they are paid to do it, usually by a corrupt government or business.

Even when a website appears to belong to a trustworthy organisation, check it out. Check the real website address. For instance, if your backtracking leads to a website purporting to be The Australian newspaper but the URL is something like www.chewbacky123.com, you have to assume it is a “fake news” site, not the real Australian newspaper.

And do not take everything that is written even on real sites as Gospel. Many media organisations push their own views or those of their owners as opinion-disguised-as-fact, maybe telling half-truths or reporting things out of context.

We all have our favourite media we think we can trust, often because their politics or philosophy match our own. But do not take that for granted. Ask yourself: “Where did they get their information from?” If it is from their own correspondent and someone you can trust, then you are far safer than if the article quotes “online opinion”.

Regularly look at other newspapers, radio stations or TV news providers to see what other news sources say. If your favourite news bulletin is out of step with everyone else, it could be that it is better than the rest; but it could also be because it is worse.

The Trust Chain needs to be strong at every link, from the source event all the way to your brain and then all the way to the eyes and ears of your readers, listeners and viewers. After that, it is up to them.

“Journalism, ‘fake news’ and disinformation”

The source of this training module is The News Manual’s Chapter Fake news & Trust Chains

The post Fake news and trust chains first appeared on Media Helping Media.

The following article is reproduced courtesy of First Draft News.

Categories, types, elements and phases

The high-resolution graphics below were created to help explain the different categories, types, elements, and phases of information disorder. They are available for use in publications and presentations under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 license. Click the link under each image to download it.

Categories of information disorder

Figure 1: The seven categories of information disorder. Credit: Claire Wardle, 2017. Click here to download high-resolution version.

1. Satire or parody: No intention to cause harm but has potential to fool.
2. Misleading content: Misleading use of information to frame an issue or individual.
3. Imposter content: when genuine sources are impersonated.
4. Fabricated content: New content is 100% false, designed to deceive and do harm.
5. False connection: When headlines, visuals, or captions don’t support the content.
6. False context: When genuine content is shared with false contextual information.
7. Manipulated content: When genuine information or imagery is manipulated to deceive.

Types of information disorder

Figure 2: Three types of information disorder. Credit: Claire Wardle & Hossein Derakshan, 2017. Click here to download high-resolution version.

1. Misinformation: Unintentional mistakes such as inaccurate photo captions, dates, statistics, translations, or when satire is taken seriously.
2. Disinformation: Fabricated or deliberately manipulated audio.visual content. Intentionally created conspiracy theories or rumours.
3. Malinformation: Deliberate publication of private information for personal or corporate rather than public interest. Deliberate change of context, date or time of genuine content.

Elements of information disorder

Figure 3: Three elements of information disorder. Credit: Claire Wardle & Hossein Derakshan, 2017. Click here to download high-resolution version.

1. Agent
2. Message
3. Interpeter

Phases of information disorder

Figure 4: Three phases of information disorder. Credit: Claire Wardle & Hossein Derakshan, 2017. Click here to download high-resolution version.

1. Creation: When the message is created.
2. (Re) Production: When the message is turned into a media product.
3. Distribution: When the product is distributed or made public.

Note: This material first appeared on First Draft and has been reproduced here with the author’s consent. 

The post Information disorder – how to recognise the forms first appeared on Media Helping Media.

The following article is reproduced courtesy of First Draft News.

Definitions and terminology matter

For the policy-makers, technology companies, politicians, journalists, librarians, educators, academics, and civil society organisations all wrestling with the challenges posed by  information disorder, agreeing to a shared vocabulary is essential.

This glossary has been compiled with research support from Grace Greason, Joe Kerwin & Nic Dias. You can download a PDF of this glossary which is embedded at the foot of this piece.

An algorithm is a fixed series of steps that a computer performs in order to solve a problem or complete a task. Social media platforms use algorithms to filter and prioritize content for each individual user based on various indicators, such as their viewing behavior and content preferences. Disinformation that is designed to provoke an emotional reaction can flourish in these spaces when algorithms detect that a user is more likely to engage with or react to similar content.¹

An API, or application programming interface, is a means by which data from one web tool or application can be exchanged with, or received by another. Many working to examine the source and spread of polluted information depend upon access to social platform APIs, but not all are created equal and the extent of publicly available data varies from platform to platform. Twitter’s open and easy-to-use API has enabled thorough research and investigation of its network, plus the development of mitigation tools such as bot detection systems. However, restrictions on other platforms and a lack of API standardization means it is not yet possible to extend and replicate this work across the social web.

Artificial intelligence (AI) describes computer programs that are “trained” to solve problems that would normally be difficult for a computer to solve. These programs “learn” from data parsed through them, adapting methods and responses in a way that will maximize accuracy. As disinformation grows in its scope and sophistication, some look to AI as a way to effectively detect and moderate concerning content. AI also contributes to the problem, automating the processes that enable the creation of more persuasive manipulations of visual imagery, and enabling disinformation campaigns that can be targeted and personalized much more efficiently.²

Automation is the process of designing a ‘machine’ to complete a task with little or no human direction. It takes tasks that would be time-consuming for humans to complete and turns them into tasks that are completed quickly and almost effortlessly. For example, it is possible to automate the process of sending a tweet, so a human doesn’t have to actively click ‘publish’. Automation processes are the backbone of techniques used to effectively ‘manufacture’ the amplification of disinformation.

Black hat SEO (search engine optimization) describes aggressive and illicit strategies used to artificially increase a website’s position within a search engine’s results, for example changing the content of a website after it has been ranked. These practices generally violate the given search engine’s terms of service as they drive traffic to a website at the expense of the user’s experience.³

Bots are social media accounts that are operated entirely by computer programs and are designed to generate posts and/or engage with content on a particular platform. In disinformation campaigns, bots can be used to draw attention to misleading narratives, to hijack platforms’ trending lists and to create the illusion of public discussion and support.⁴ Researchers and technologists take different approaches to identifying bots, using algorithms or simpler rules based on number of posts per day.⁵

A botnet is a collection or network of bots that act in coordination and are typically operated by one person or group. Commercial botnets can include as many as tens of thousands of bots.⁶

Data mining is the process of monitoring large volumes of data by combining tools from statistics and artificial intelligence to recognize useful patterns. Through collecting information about an individual’s activity, disinformation agents have a mechanism by which they can target users on the basis of their posts, likes and browsing history. A common fear among researchers is that, as psychological profiles fed by data mining become more sophisticated, users could be targeted based on how susceptible they are to believing certain false narratives.⁷

Dark ads are advertisements that are only visible to the publisher and their target audience. For example, Facebook allows advertisers to create posts that reach specific users based on their demographic profile, page ‘likes’, and their listed interests, but that are not publicly visible. These types of targeted posts cost money and are therefore considered a form of advertising. Because these posts are only seen by a segment of the audience, they are difficult to monitor or track.⁸

Deepfakes is the term currently being used to describe fabricated media produced using artificial intelligence. By synthesizing different elements of existing video or audio files, AI enables relatively easy methods for creating ‘new’ content, in which individuals appear to speak words and perform actions, which are not based on reality. Although still in their infancy, it is likely we will see examples of this type of synthetic media used more frequently in disinformation campaigns, as these techniques become more sophisticated.⁹

A dormant account is a social media account that has not posted or engaged with other accounts for an extended period of time. In the context of disinformation, this description is used for accounts that may be human- or bot-operated, which remain inactive until they are ‘programmed’ or instructed to perform another task.¹⁰

Doxing or doxxing is the act of publishing private or identifying information about an individual online, without his or her permission. This information can include full names, addresses, phone numbers, photos and more.¹¹ Doxing is an example of malinformation, which is accurate information shared publicly to cause harm.

Disinformation is false information that is deliberately created or disseminated with the express purpose to cause harm. Producers of disinformation typically have political, financial, psychological or social motivations.¹²

Encryption is the process of encoding data so that it can be interpreted only by intended recipients. Many popular messaging services such as WhatsApp encrypt the texts, photos and videos sent between users. This prevents governments from reading the content of intercepted WhatsApp messages.

Fact-checking (in the context of information disorder) is the process of determining the truthfulness and accuracy of official, published information such as politicians’ statements and news reports.¹³ Fact-checking emerged in the U.S. in the 1990s, as a way of authenticating claims made in political ads airing on television. There are now around 150 fact-checking organizations in the world,¹⁴ and many now also debunk mis- and disinformation from unofficial sources circulating online.

Fake followers are anonymous or imposter social media accounts created to portray false impressions of popularity about another account. Social media users can pay for fake followers as well as fake likes, views and shares to give the appearance of a larger audience. For example, one English-based service offers YouTube users a million “high-quality” views and 50,000 likes for $3,150.¹⁵

Malinformation is genuine information that is shared to cause harm.¹⁶ This includes private or revealing information that is spread to harm a person or reputation.

Manufactured amplification occurs when the reach or spread of information is boosted through artificial means. This includes human and automated manipulation of search engine results and trending lists, and the promotion of certain links or hashtags on social media.¹⁷ There are online price lists for different types of amplification, including prices for generating fake votes and signatures in online polls and petitions, and the cost of downranking specific content from search engine results.¹⁸

The formal definition of the term meme, coined by biologist Richard Dawkins in 1976, is an idea or behavior that spreads person to person throughout a culture by propagating rapidly, and changing over time.¹⁹ The term is now used most frequently to describe captioned photos or GIFs that spread online, and the most effective are humorous or critical of society. They are increasingly being used as powerful vehicles of disinformation.

Misinformation is information that is false, but not intended to cause harm. For example, individuals who don’t know a piece of information is false may spread it on social media in an attempt to be helpful.²⁰

Propaganda is true or false information spread to persuade an audience, but often has a political connotation and is often connected to information produced by governments. It is worth noting that the lines between advertising, publicity and propaganda are often unclear.²¹

Satire is writing that uses literary devices such as ridicule and irony to criticize elements of society. Satire can become misinformation if audiences misinterpret it as fact.²² There is a known trend of disinformation agents labelling content as satire to prevent it from being flagged by fact-checkers.

Scraping is the process of extracting data from a website without the use of an API. It is often used by researchers and computational journalists to monitor mis- and disinformation on different social platforms and forums. Typically, scraping violates a website’s terms of service (i.e., the rules that users agree to in order to use a platform). However, researchers and journalists often justify scraping because of the lack of any other option when trying to investigate and study the impact of algorithms.

A sock puppet is an online account that uses a false identity designed specifically to deceive. Sock puppets are used on social platforms to inflate another account’s follower numbers and to spread or amplify false information to a mass audience.²³ The term is considered by some to be synonymous with the term “bot”.

Spam is unsolicited, impersonal online communication, generally used to promote, advertise or scam the audience. Today, it is mostly distributed via email, and algorithms detect, filter and block spam from users’ inboxes. Similar technologies to those implemented in the fight against spam could potentially be used in the context of information disorder, once accepted criteria and indicators have been agreed.

Trolling is the act of deliberately posting offensive or inflammatory content to an online community with the intent of provoking readers or disrupting conversation. Today, the term “troll” is most often used to refer to any person harassing or insulting others online. However, it has also been used to describe human-controlled accounts performing bot-like activities.

A troll farm is a group of individuals engaging in trolling or bot-like promotion of narratives in a coordinated fashion. One prominent troll farm was the Russia-based Internet Research Agency that spread inflammatory content online in an attempt to interfere in the U.S. presidential election.²⁴

Verification is the process of determining the authenticity of information posted by unofficial sources online, particularly visual media.²⁵ It emerged as a new skill set for journalists and human rights activists in the late 2000s, most notably in response to the need to verify visual imagery during the ‘Arab Spring’.

A VPN, or virtual private network, is used to encrypt a user’s data and conceal his or her identity and location. This makes it difficult for platforms to know where someone pushing disinformation or purchasing ads is located. It is also sensible to use a VPN when investigating online spaces where disinformation campaigns are being produced.
Download a PDF of this glossary.

1 Wardle, C. & H. Derakshan (September 27, 2017) Information Disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/information-disorder-toward-an-interdisciplinary-framework-for-researc/168076277c
2 Ghosh, D. & B. Scott (January 2018) #DigitalDeceit: The Technologies Behind Precision Propaganda on the Internet, New America
3 Ghosh, D. & B. Scott (January 2018) #DigitalDeceit: The Technologies Behind Precision Propaganda on the Internet, New America
4 Wardle, C. & H. Derakshan (September 27, 2017) Information Disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/information-disorder-toward-an-interdisciplinary-framework-for-researc/168076277c
5 Howard, P. N. & K. Bence (2016) Bots, #StrongerIn, and #Brexit: Computational Propaganda during the UK-EU Referendu, COMPROP Research note, 2016.1, http://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/89/2016/06/COMPROP-2016-1.pdf
6 Ignatova, T.V., V.A. Ivichev, V.A. & F.F. Khusnoiarov (December 2, 2015) Analysis of Blogs, Forums, and Social Networks, Problems of Economic Transition
7 Ghosh, D. & B. Scott (January 2018) #DigitalDeceit: The Technologies Behind Precision Propaganda on the Internet, New America
8 Wardle, C. & H. Derakshan (September 27, 2017) Information Disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/information-disorder-toward-an-interdisciplinary-framework-for-researc/168076277c
9 Li, Y. Chang, M.C. Lyu, S. (June 11, 2018) In Ictu Oculi: Exposing AI Generated Fake Face Videos by Detecting Eye Blinking, Computer Science Department, University at Albany, SUNY
10 Ince, D. (2013) A Dictionary of the Internet (3 ed.), Oxford University Press
11 MacAllister, J. (2017) The Doxing Dilemma: Seeking a Remedy for the Malicious Publication of Personal Information, Fordham Law Review, https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5370&context=fl
12 Wardle, C. & H. Derakshan (September 27, 2017) Information Disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/information-disorder-toward-an-interdisciplinary-framework-for-researc/168076277c
13 Mantzarlis, A. (2015) Will Verification Kill Fact-Checking?, The Poynter Institute, https://www.poynter.org/news/will-verification-kill-fact-checking
14 Funke, D. (2018) Report: There are 149 fact-checking projects in 53 countries. That’s a new high, The Poynter Institute, https://www.poynter.org/news/report-there-are-149-fact-checking-projects-53-countries-thats-new-high
15 Gu, L., V. Kropotov & F. Yarochkin (2017) The Fake News Machine: How Propagandists Abuse the Internet and Manipulate the Public. Oxford University, https://documents.trendmicro.com/assets/white_papers/wp-fake-news-machine-howpropagandists-abuse-the-internet.pdf
16 Wardle, C. & H. Derakshan (September 27, 2017) Information Disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/information-disorder-toward-an-interdisciplinary-framework-for-researc/168076277c
17 Wardle, C. & H. Derakshan (September 27, 2017) Information Disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/information-disorder-toward-an-interdisciplinary-framework-for-researc/168076277c
18 Gu, L., V. Kropotov & F. Yarochkin (2017) The Fake News Machine: How Propagandists Abuse the Internet and Manipulate the Public. Oxford University, https://documents.trendmicro.com/assets/white_papers/wp-fake-news-machine-howpropagandists-abuse-the-internet.pdf
19 Dawkins, R. (1976) The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Press.
20 Wardle, C. & H. Derakshan (September 27, 2017) Information Disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/information-disorder-toward-an-interdisciplinary-framework-for-researc/168076277c
21 Jack, C. (2017) Lexicon of Lies, Data & Society, https://datasociety.net/pubs/oh/DataAndSociety_LexiconofLies.pdf
22 Wardle, C. & H. Derakshan (September 27, 2017) Information Disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/information-disorder-toward-an-interdisciplinary-framework-for-researc/168076277c
23 Hofileña, C. F. (Oct. 9, 2016) Fake accounts, manufactured reality on social media, Rappler, https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/investigative/148347-fake-accounts-manufactured-reality-social-media
24 Office of the Director of National Intelligence. (2017). Assessing Russian activities and intentions in recent US elections. Washington, D.C.: National Intelligence Council, https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf.
25 Mantzarlis, A. (2015) Will Verification Kill Fact-Checking?, The Poynter Institute, https://www.poynter.org/news/will-verification-kill-fact-checking

By Claire Wardle, with research support from Grace Greason, Joe Kerwin & Nic Dias.

Note: This material first appeared on First Draft and has been reproduced here with the author’s consent. 

The post Information disorder – the essential glossary first appeared on Media Helping Media.