DOCSLIB.ORG

Individual Differences in Susceptibility to False Memories for COVID-19

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Individual Differences in Susceptibility to False Memories for COVID-19 Greene and Murphy Cogn. Research (2020) 5:63 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-020-00262-1 Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications BRIEF REPORT Open Access Individual diferences in susceptibility to false memories for COVID-19 fake news Ciara M. Greene1* and Gillian Murphy2 Abstract Exposure to ‘fake news’ can result in false memories, with possible consequences for downstream behaviour. Given the sharp rise in online misinformation during the coronavirus pandemic, it is important to understand the factors that infuence the development of false memories. The present study measured susceptibility to false memories fol- lowing exposure to fabricated news stories about the pandemic in a sample of 3746 participants. We investigated the efect of individual diferences in (1) knowledge about COVID-19, (2) engagement with media or discussion about the coronavirus, (3) anxiety about COVID-19 and (4) analytical reasoning. Notably, objectively and subjectively assessed knowledge about COVID-19 were not signifcantly correlated. Objectively assessed knowledge was associated with fewer false memories but more true memories, suggesting a true discrimination between true and fake news. In con- trast, participants who merely believed themselves to be very knowledgeable were more likely to report a memory for true stories, but showed no reduction in false memories. Similarly, individuals who reported high levels of media engagement or anxiety about COVID-19 reported an increase in true (but not false) memories. Finally, higher levels of analytical reasoning were associated with fewer memories for both true and fabricated stories, suggesting a stricter threshold for reporting a memory for any story. These data indicate that false memories can form in response to fake COVID-19 news and that susceptibility to this misinformation is afected by the individual’s knowledge about and interaction with COVID-19 information, as well as their tendency to think critically. Signifcance statement with acceptance of COVID-19 fake news. We report that Te coronavirus pandemic has been associated with an people who are more knowledgeable about COVID-19 or unprecedented surge in online misinformation, to the who score better on a test of analytical reasoning, are less extent that the World Health Organisation has warned prone to reporting false memories following exposure to of an ‘infodemic’ that may have signifcant behavioural fabricated stories. In contrast, people who simply believe consequences. Previous research has shown that expo- themselves to be knowledgeable are more likely to report sure to ‘fake news’ can result in false memories, with memories for true stories, but are not protected against possible consequences for subsequent behaviour. Suscep- false memories. People who are very anxious about tibility to these false memories is afected by individual COVID-19, or who engage with a lot of related content, diferences in a range of variables. If online health mis- are also more likely to report a memory for true (but not information is to be efectively countered, it is critical false) stories. Tese fndings may help in the development that we understand which factors will lead individuals to of fake news interventions and suggest that a combina- believe, remember or act on fake news. In this study, we tion of interventions aimed at increasing public knowl- identify a series of factors with proven links to misinfor- edge and encouraging critical evaluation of news stories mation susceptibility, and investigate their relationship may be most efective. *Correspondence: [email protected] 1 School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © The Author(s) 2020. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creat iveco mmons .org/licen ses/by/4.0/. Greene and Murphy Cogn. Research (2020) 5:63 Page 2 of 8 Introduction efects of self-reported knowledge and overclaiming see Te months since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic Atir et al. 2015; Pennycook and Rand 2020). Tese fnd- have seen a sharp rise in the quantity of online misin- ings have clear signifcance in the case of COVID-19 formation (Brennen et al. 2020; Kouzy et al. 2020). It has and the associated ‘infodemic’, as people are bombarded been argued that this ‘fake news’ may have severe conse- with enormous quantities of both true and fabricated quences for public health and adherence to public health health information. Tis deluge of information may also guidelines (e.g. O’Connor and Murphy 2020; Van Bavel contribute to high rates of virus-anxiety (Jungmann and et al. 2020; but see Greene and Murphy 2020). Exposure Witthöft 2020). It is not known if individuals who are to fabricated news stories can result in false memories particularly anxious about the public health situation, or for the events depicted in the stories (Frenda et al. 2013; who consider themselves to be at high risk for COVID- O’Connell and Greene 2017; Polage 2012). Tese memo- 19, may be particularly susceptible to forming or report- ries are often reported in rich detail and are more likely ing false memories for related news items. when a false story aligns with an individual’s political or Reporting false memories for fake news stories has social views (Murphy et al. 2019). False memories may been associated with lower levels of cognitive ability have behavioural consequences (see Laney and Loftus (Murphy et al. 2019) and analytical reasoning (Greene 2016 for a review); it is therefore important to under- et al. 2020). Tese fndings ft well with research linking stand the factors leading to their formation, so that efec- critical-thinking defcits with belief in fake news (Bago tive interventions can be put in place. et al. 2020; Pennycook and Rand 2019, 2020), and with Tere are a range of contextual factors that may infu- increased acceptance of COVID-19 misinformation ence an individual’s tendency to believe, remember (Pennycook et al. 2020a, b). Notably, Martire et al. (2020), or share a piece of misinformation. Tese include ele- writing in the present special issue of Cognitive Research: ments that increase the ‘truthiness’, or subjective feel- Principles and Implications, report that even individuals ing of truth about a story. Real-world news stories are who endorse clearly implausible claims (e.g. “the earth is typically accompanied by a photograph, that may or may fat”) are more persuaded by high-quality evidence than not provide additional information about the content low quality evidence. Tis suggests that at least some of the story. Research has shown that presenting a non- critical analysis is taking place; the authors argue that it probative photograph alongside a text description can may be more appropriate to argue that individuals who suggest the presence of multiple corroborating sources accept the implausible claims sometimes found in fake for the fabricated event, and thus increase truth ratings news engage in less refective thinking rather than none (Newman and Zhang 2020; Newman et al. 2012) and at all. false memory rates (Strange et al. 2011). Similarly, mul- Understanding the role of these factors in the context tiple presentations of a story can trick participants into of the coronavirus crisis is the key frst step in developing feeling an increased sense of familiarity for the events efective interventions; for example, a focus on increas- depicted—a phenomenon termed ‘illusory truth’ (Penny- ing public knowledge will be inefective if misinformation cook et al. 2018). acceptance is driven, not by ignorance, but by a failure to Individual diferences in a range of variables, includ- critically analyse unverifed content. ing age, intelligence and personality traits, may afect the propensity to form a false memory for misinformation The present study (Lee 2004; Roediger and Geraci 2007; Zhu et al. 2010a, b). We investigated the efect of individual diferences in a In addition, expertise or a high level of interest in a par- range of variables on the formation of false memories for ticular topic has been associated with an increased ten- fabricated news items. Tese include objectively assessed dency to form false memories related to that topic (Baird and subjectively perceived knowledge about, engagement 2003; Castel et al. 2007; Mehta et al. 2011; O’Connell and with and anxiety relating to COVID-19, as well as indi- Greene 2017). Recent evidence has however suggested vidual diferences in critical reasoning. We hypothesised that objectively assessed subject-knowledge is associ- that perceived knowledge, anxiety and engagement with ated with better discrimination in reported memories for COVID-related media would be associated with a bias true and fabricated stories, while interest or engagement towards reporting memories for related stories, result- with a topic increases the tendency to report a memory ing in increased rates of both true and false memories. for any given story (Greene et al. 2020). Tis suggests In contrast, we expected objectively assessed knowledge that reports of false memories associated with knowledge about the coronavirus to be associated with better dis- of a topic may be the result of overclaiming, as partici- crimination between true and fabricated stories, resulting pants are reluctant to admit ignorance of events pertain- in increased true memories but decreased false memo- ing to their area of interest (for similar fndings on the ries.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Automated Tackling of Disinformation
    Automated tackling of disinformation STUDY Panel for the Future of Science and Technology European Science-Media Hub EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Scientific Foresight Unit (STOA) PE 624.278 – March 2019 EN Automated tackling of disinformation Major challenges ahead This study maps and analyses current and future threats from online misinformation, alongside currently adopted socio-technical and legal approaches. The challenges of evaluating their effectiveness and practical adoption are also discussed. Drawing on and complementing existing literature, the study summarises and analyses the findings of relevant journalistic and scientific studies and policy reports in relation to detecting, containing and countering online disinformation and propaganda campaigns. It traces recent developments and trends and identifies significant new or emerging challenges. It also addresses potential policy implications for the EU of current socio-technical solutions. ESMH | European Science-Media Hub AUTHORS This study was written by Alexandre Alaphilippe, Alexis Gizikis and Clara Hanot of EU DisinfoLab, and Kalina Bontcheva of The University of Sheffield, at the request of the Panel for the Future of Science and Technology (STOA). It has been financed under the European Science and Media Hub budget and managed by the Scientific Foresight Unit within the Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services (EPRS) of the Secretariat of the European Parliament. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank all respondents to the online survey, as well as first draft, WeVerify, InVID, PHEME, REVEAL, and all other initiatives that contributed materials to the study. ADMINISTRATOR RESPONSIBLE Mihalis Kritikos, Scientific Foresight Unit To contact the publisher, please e-mail [email protected] LINGUISTIC VERSION Original: EN Manuscript completed in March 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Public Diplomacy Survive the Internet?
    D C CAN PUBLIC DIPLOMACY SURVIVE THE INTERNET? BOTS, ECHO CHAMBERS, AND DISINFORMATION Edited by Shawn Powers and Markos Kounalakis May 2017 TRANSMITTAL LETTER Tothe President, Congress, Secretary of State and the American People: Established in 1948, the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy (ACPD) is authorized pur­ suant to Public Law 114- 113 to appraise all U.S. government efforts to understand, inform and in­ fluence foreign publics. We achieve this goal in a variety of ways, including, among other efforts, offering policy recommendations, and through our Comprehensive Annual Report, which tracks how the roughly $1.8 billion in appropriated funds is spent on public diplomacy efforts throughout the world. Part of the Commission’s mandate is to help the State Department prepare for cutting edge and transformative changes, which have the potential to upend how we think about engaging with foreign publics. This report aims to achieve precisely that. In order to think carefully about public diplomacy in this ever and rapidly changing communications space, the Commission convened a group of private sector, government, and academic experts at Stanford University’s Hoover Insti­ tution to discuss the latest research and trends in strategic communication in digital spaces. The results of that workshop, refined by a number of follow-on interviews and discussions with other organizations interested in similar questions, are included in this report. Can Public Diplomacy Survive the Internet? features essays by workshop participants that focus on emergent and potentially transformative technology and communication patterns. The essays also highlight the potential challenges and opportunities these changes create for public diplomacy practitioners in particular and the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Perceived Truth of Statements and Simulated Social Media Postings
    Nadarevic et al. Cogn. Research (2020) 5:56 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-020-00251-4 Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications ORIGINAL ARTICLE Open Access Perceived truth of statements and simulated social media postings: an experimental investigation of source credibility, repeated exposure, and presentation format Lena Nadarevic1* , Rolf Reber2, Anne Josephine Helmecke1 and Dilara Köse1 Abstract To better understand the spread of fake news in the Internet age, it is important to uncover the variables that infu- ence the perceived truth of information. Although previous research identifed several reliable predictors of truth judgments—such as source credibility, repeated information exposure, and presentation format—little is known about their simultaneous efects. In a series of four experiments, we investigated how the abovementioned factors jointly afect the perceived truth of statements (Experiments 1 and 2) and simulated social media postings (Experi- ments 3 and 4). Experiment 1 explored the role of source credibility (high vs. low vs. no source information) and pres- entation format (with vs. without a picture). In Experiments 2 and 3, we additionally manipulated repeated exposure (yes vs. no). Finally, Experiment 4 examined the role of source credibility (high vs. low) and type of repetition (congru- ent vs. incongruent vs. no repetition) in further detail. In sum, we found no efect of presentation format on truth judgments, but strong, additive efects of source credibility and repetition. Truth judgments were higher for informa- tion presented by credible sources than non-credible sources and information without sources. Moreover, congruent (i.e., verbatim) repetition increased perceived truth whereas semantically incongruent repetition decreased perceived truth, irrespectively of the source.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative Facts Resource Guide
    Rutgers University-Camden March 6th, 2017 Teaching Matters and Assessment Center (TMAC) Dr. William FitzGerald, Director │ Brynn Kairis, Graduate Assistant Resource Guide: Teaching in a “Post-Truth” Era What is a “Post-Truth” World? “The Emergence of a Post-Fact World” by Francis Fukuyama “Post-Truth Pluralism: The Unlikely Political Wisdom of Nietzsche” by Kathleen Higgins “The Post-Truth World: Yes, I’d Lie to You” by The Economist “Alternative Facts in a Post-Truth World?” by Jay Ogilvy “Word of the Year 2016” by Oxford Dictionary Recent Studies on Civic and Information Literacies “Americans Fail a Basic Test on Their History and Institutions” by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute “Students Have ‘Dismaying’ Inability to Tell Fake News from Real, Study Finds” by Camila Domonoske (NPR) “Evaluating Information: The Cornerstone of Civic Online Reasoning” by the Stanford History Education Group Report on Stanford Study (Above) by Brooke Donald Perspectives on the University’s Role in a “Post-Truth” Era “American Universities Must Take a Stand” by Leon Botstein (NYT) “Teach Students How to Spot Fake News, Say Academics” by Richard Vaughan (iNews) “Teaching in the Post-Truth Era” by Johnathan Gold (The Huffington Post) “Alternative Facts, Fake News, and the Anguish of the ‘Objective’ Teacher” by The Virtual Pedagogue “Education in a Post-Truth World” by Michael A. Peters Teaching in the “Post-Truth” Era “Five Ways Teachers are Fighting Fake News” by Sophia Alvarez Boyd (NPR) “Fake News? Bias? How Colleges Teach Students
    [Show full text]
  • Misinformation, Disinformation, Malinformation: Causes, Trends, and Their Influence on Democracy
    E-PAPER A Companion to Democracy #3 Misinformation, Disinformation, Malinformation: Causes, Trends, and Their Influence on Democracy LEJLA TURCILO AND MLADEN OBRENOVIC A Publication of Heinrich Böll Foundation, August 2020 Preface to the e-paper series “A Companion to Democracy” Democracy is multifaceted, adaptable – and must constantly meet new challenges. Democratic systems are influenced by the historical and social context, by a country’s geopolitical circumstances, by the political climate and by the interaction between institutions and actors. But democracy cannot be taken for granted. It has to be fought for, revitalised and renewed. There are a number of trends and challenges that affect democracy and democratisation. Some, like autocratisation, corruption, the delegitimisation of democratic institutions, the shrinking space for civil society or the dissemination of misleading and erroneous information, such as fake news, can shake democracy to its core. Others like human rights, active civil society engagement and accountability strengthen its foundations and develop alongside it. The e-paper series “A Companion to Democracy” examines pressing trends and challenges facing the world and analyses how they impact democracy and democratisation. Misinformation, Disinformation, Malinformation: Causes, Trends, and Their Influence on Democracy 2/ 38 Misinformation, Disinformation, Malinformation: Causes, Trends, and Their Influence on Democracy 3 Lejla Turcilo and Mladen Obrenovic Contents 1. Introduction 4 2. Historical origins of misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation 5 3. Information disorder – key concepts and definitions 7 3.1. Fake news – definitions, motives, forms 7 3.2. Disinformation, misinformation, malinformation 8 4. Distortion of truth and manipulation of consent 12 5. Democracy at risk in post-truth society – how misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation destroy democratic values 17 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Fehlinformationen, Desinformationen, Malinformationen: Ursachen, Entwicklungen Und Ihr Einfluss Auf Die Demokratie
    E-PAPER Demokratie im Fokus #3 Fehlinformationen, Desinformationen, Malinformationen: Ursachen, Entwicklungen und ihr Einfluss auf die Demokratie LEJLA TURCILO UND MLADEN OBRENOVIC Eine Publikation der Heinrich Böll Stiftung, August 2020 Vorwort zur E-Paper-Reihe „Demokratie im Fokus“ Demokratien sind facettenreich und anpassungsfähig. Demokratische Systeme werden vom historischen und sozialen Kontext beeinflusst, von den geopolitischen Gegebenheiten eines Landes, vom politischen Klima und Zusammenwirken von Institutionen und Akteuren. Doch Demokratie ist kein Selbstläufer. Sie muss erkämpft, mit Leben erfüllt und erneuert werden – und muss sich stetig neuen Herausforderungen stellen. Dabei wirken unterschiedliche Trends und Herausforderungen auf Demokratie und Demokratisierungen. Dazu zählen zum Beispiel Autokratiserung und Korruption oder der Legitimationsverlust demokratischer Institutionen, die Einschränkung zivilgesellschaftlicher Handlungsspielräume und die Verbreitung irreführender und falscher Informationen, die eine Demokratie in ihren Grundfesten erschüttern können. Andere, wie die Rechenschaftspflicht, Stärkung Menschenrechte, eine freie und plurale Medienlandschaft, politische Partizipation und aktives zivilgesellschaftliches Engagement stärken ihre Grundlagen und entwickeln sich an ihrer Seite weiter. Die E-Paper-Reihe „Demokratie im Fokus“ widmet sich den aktuellen globalen Trends und Herausforderungen und diskutiert die Rückwirkungen auf die Demokratie und Demokratisierung. Fehlinformationen, Desinformationen, Malinformationen:
    [Show full text]
  • Who Is Most Likely to Believe and to Share Misinformation?
    FEBRUARY 2020 Who is most likely to believe and to share misinformation? A JOINT BRIEFING FROM: About this briefing Misinformation causes real harm to people’s lives, health, finances and to democracy. We need good evidence on how to tackle it. This briefing is part of a research programme set up by Africa Check, Chequeado and Full Fact, to find that evidence and make it useful. In this briefing Full Fact’s ResearcherDr. Dora-Olivia Vicol looks at the cognitive biases behind the belief in, and sharing of, misinformation. We thank Paula Szewach and the research team at the Africa Centre for Evidence for their help in gathering regional evidence. We also extend our warmest thanks to Dr. Briony Thompson for her constructive feedback on earlier drafts. We welcome feedback and comments at [email protected] Full Fact 2 Carlton Gardens London SW1Y 5AA k [email protected] D @FullFact K fullfact.org Africa Check Johannesburg K africacheck.org Chequeado Buenos Aires K chequeado.com This research was supported by a grant from Luminate. Published by Africa Check, Chequeado and Full Fact, February 2020. Published under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Who is most likely to believe and to share misinformation? Contents Summary ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������4 Age and education particularities��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������5
    [Show full text]
  • Get the Facts: Finding Truthful News
    1 Get the Facts: Finding Truthful News “A lie can get halfway around the world before the truth can even get its boots on.” – Mark Twain What is fake news? Fake news is rampant in the digital age. For the scope of this class, “fake news” encompasses misinformation, or, any information that is false, partly false, or presented in a skewed or biased manner. Fake headlines are often exaggerated and inflammatory in order to attract “clicks” and visits to a specific site, which generates revenue. Social media is also enabling the spread fake news and misinformation; news that seems “real” or “true” is often shared faster than experts can fact-check. Fake news is also a subset of the wider “bad news” trend, “which also encompasses many forms of shoddy, unresearched, error-filled, and deliberately misleading reporting that do a disservice to everyone.”1 Remember: misinformation and misleading information doesn’t only take the form of news! You can apply the same techniques discussed in class to advertisements, images, sponsorships, satires, and individual social media posts, among many other information outlets. Class Outcomes: By the end of class today, you should be able to: - Identify misleading or false information, including satire, using telltale signs and signifiers. - Use a number of online tools to verify facts and information. - Use due diligence to inspect, verify, and evaluate news sources before sharing or propagating them. - Understand the difference between weak sense and strong sense critical thinking, and use both of them! 1 Kiely, E. & Robertson, L. (n.d.) How to Spot Fake News.
    [Show full text]
  • Combatting Misinformation Requires Recognizing Its Types and the Factors That Facilitate Its Spread and Resonance
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321787568 Combatting Misinformation Requires Recognizing Its Types and the Factors That Facilitate Its Spread and Resonance Article in Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition · December 2017 DOI: 10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.09.005 CITATIONS READS 12 1,903 2 authors, including: Riley E. Dunlap Oklahoma State University - Stillwater 369 PUBLICATIONS 25,266 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Climate change: political polarization and organized denial View project Tracking changes in environmental worldview over time View project All content following this page was uploaded by Riley E. Dunlap on 16 December 2017. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition 6 (2017) 389–396 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition journa l homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jarmac Commentary Combatting Misinformation Requires Recognizing Its Types and the Factors That Facilitate Its Spread and Resonance a,∗ b Aaron M. McCright , Riley E. Dunlap a Michigan State University, United States b Oklahoma State University, United States As sociologists who have studied organized climate change Nebraska, Lincoln), workshops (e.g., “Seeking Truth in a ‘Post- denial and the political polarization on anthropogenic climate Truth’ World” at Bethel University), speaker series (e.g., “Media change that it has produced in the US since the late 1990s and Politics in a Post-Truth Era” at Furman University), and (Dunlap, McCright, & Yarosh, 2016; McCright & Dunlap, courses (e.g., “Calling Bullshit” at the University of Washington) 2000), we have closely followed the work of Lewandowsky and to interrogate misinformation in the present era.
    [Show full text]
  • 4. What Is the Story?
    SHARON A. MURCHIE AND JANET A. NEYER 4. WHAT IS THE STORY? Reading the Web as Narrative INTRODUCTION Jayson was fired up. It was October, a few weeks before the presidential election, and he was much more interested in stirring up conflict than he was in writing about it. “She defended a child rapist! And then she laughed about it!” he claimed. “No, that is not even a thing!” Alisha jumped in. “She was a public defender! She HAD to defend him. That was her job! That’s called defending the public! You don’t get to just choose the good people to defend!” “She laughed that he got off,” Jayson insisted, “and then she laughed that he passed a lie detector test!” “No, that is not even how that went down!” Alisha was hot, now. “You are so ignorant!” This was my1 teacher cue to jump in, reminding them that the writing prompt on the board was about conflict they experienced in their lives, and this would be a good time to write about it. They clearly had a moment they could describe. And also, I had to add, we could argue ideas in the classroom, but not insult each other. “Fine,” Alisha snapped. ”Your facts are so ignorant!” WHAT IS THE STORY? SEARCHING FOR TRUTH Heated discussions about “facts” like this one are becoming all too prevalent in our classrooms and in our lives. In a 2016 study by Stanford’s History Education Group, researchers collected 8,000 responses from middle school, high school, and college students, asking them to evaluate online information presented in various platforms.
    [Show full text]
  • READING REFERENCES 2020 Council Library
    Council of the European Union General Secretariat READING REFERENCES 2020 Council Library WHAT IS DISINFORMATION? Council of the European Union Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 - B-1048 Bruxelles/Brussel - Belgique/België Tel. +32 (0)2 281 65 25 Follow us http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/library-blog/ - #EUCOlibrary Introduction This is the first in a series of reading lists that are intended to provide an overview of disinformation research for those of you who either work in policy areas impacted by ongoing disinformation campaigns, or who are being exposed to disinformation in the information and communication media, and that aim to help build resilience by extending your knowledge of the topic. When researching disinformation, it is likely that a considerable amount of time will be spent disentangling one's findings from their intrinsic ambiguity, the confusion surrounding the concept of disinformation in the media and in informal speech, and the misuse of the term even among specialists. More recently, popular terms such as 'fake news' have contributed to the confusion amid accusations of political bias, journalistic partisanship and modern political propaganda. This reading list will serve as an introduction to the complicated concept of disinformation. As a point of departure, in carrying out research for this reading list we have looked at disinformation as both an activity itself and as the product of that activity. This list includes an overview of discussions on key concepts such as master narratives, misinformation and Russian active measures, so as to help clarify what disinformation is and how to distinguish it successfully from its false friends.
    [Show full text]
  • Truthiness: This American Life and the Monologist Teaching Note CSJ
    CSJ- 12- 0046.3 • • Truthiness: This American Life and the Monologist Teaching Note Case Summary Upholding the highest standards of accuracy is an ongoing challenge for any news organization. Sometimes errors occur despite all efforts to vet sources and check facts, leaving outlets in the challenging position of trying to correct the record while preserving their credibility with the public. This case explores one news program’s efforts to maintain strict accuracy, and its strategy to pick up the pieces when those efforts fail. Ira Glass, host of the hit public radio documentary show This American Life, and his staff are always searching for interesting voices to incorporate in their weekly program. Veteran journalists, they pride themselves on presenting stories told in a familiar, narrative style, but as factually precise as straight news. When Glass attends a one-­­­man show by a performer named Mike Daisey about the punishing working conditions he witnessed at manufacturing plants in China where popular Apple products are built, he quickly arranges for Daisey to adapt the monologue for radio. Before the performance airs, Glass and his producer, Brian Reed, discuss with Daisey the necessity of unassailable accuracy, which Daisey seems to understand and embrace. They also take steps to fact-­­­check the story, running the details by experts familiar with working conditions in China. While producers are not able to double-­­­check every detail of Daisey’s trip to visit the factories—most notably, they do not locate his translator, the one person who accompanied him throughout—by that point they have little reason to doubt Daisey’s word and proceed in good faith.
    [Show full text]