DOCSLIB.ORG

Snopes Digest

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

MEMBERS ONLY Snopes Digest 21 January 2020 • Issue #2 1 It's Misinformation Prime Time Between geopolitics, impeachment, and the presidential election, it’s high season for rumors to take root. Snopes Managing Editor Doreen Marchionni explains how to stay informed as news breaks. 2 Behind The Snopes Snopes General Manager Vinny Green talks about the unique challenges of having a newsroom without a physical room. 3 In Case You Missed It The most popular and most important stories on Snopes.com lately. 4 Snopes-worthy Reads Good stories we’ve shared amongst ourselves recently. Issue #2 edited by Brandon Echter, Vinny Green, and Bond Huberman. 1. It's Misinformation Prime Time On Jan. 3, news that the U.S. assassinated Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani flashed across our screens big and small, raising the specter of war. Exactly one month later, the Iowa caucuses will kick off the 2020 U.S. presidential election in earnest. And in between begins the impeachment trial in the Senate, when a president known for his falsehoods will go to political war. Between breaking news, electioneering, foreign affairs, and the regular glut of scams and spam, this month is a bonanza of falsehoods, viral rumors, and muck. So what can a private citizen do to stay calm and not contribute to the rumor-mongering? Think before you share. That applies to everything you do on the web but especially in times of national conflict. Even the innocent sharing of dubious information expands the audience for bunk by orders of magnitude at times. Consider the math: Say you have 300 friends on Facebook. If you share dubious info to your news feed, and only 10 percent see the post and share it to their friends, that’s another 30 people who could potentially share that to their 300 friends and so on. The numbers get big in split seconds. Go directly to the source. Want to know the secret to fact- checking at Snopes? Primary sources. What are those? They’re the original, authentic source of information on something. If your mama tells you she loves you, she’s a primary source — the message comes straight from her loving mouth to your ear. If your mama’s friend tells you your mama loves you, that friend is a secondary source. We’re certain mama still loves you but be wary of stories that rely only on secondary sources, and seek out primary sources, if you can, to verify. Be vigilant for prejudice. We’re in the grip in the U.S. of extraordinary hostility aimed at, among others, Muslims, Jews, people of color, transgender individuals — historically oppressed groups. If you trip across something that has even the whiff of prejudice, do us and your truth-loving friends an enormous, compassionate favor: Don’t spread the word, at least without context or commentary. By following these basic rules, you can help us make a healthier, more truthful internet for everyone. Stay safe out there, Doreen Marchionni Managing Editor, Snopes P.S. Have feedback on this newsletter or the previous issue? Write to us here. Snopes Expert Network Being a fact-checker at Snopes means researching everything from climate science to pop culture to animal memes. We need all the help we can get. That means we need you, too. Join the Snopes Expert Network, a group of everyday people who can help us check claims about, well, anything. It's simple — you tell us what you know a lot about, and we'll contact you if a story demands your expertise. Join the Network 2. Behind The Snopes How Snopes works, from the people who make it. Do you know where Snopes is based? Don’t Google Snopes it! Well, if you guessed California, you’d be technically correct — that’s where the Snopes business was incorporated and where we fetch our snail mail. But only five of our employees call the Golden State home. Our company founder, managing editor, and two other members of the team live in Washington state. For those of you counting along at home, that’s only nine people so far. What about everyone else? The remaining staff is spread across the country with one person working in each of the following states: Pennsylvania, Illinois, Tennessee, New York, Oregon, and Massachusetts. And we’re all working from home, local coffee shops, and other places. Are you keeping count? That’s 15 people, eight states, and zero formal offices. Would things be easier if we were all in one place? In some ways. Would Snopes be better? Not a chance. Hiring people in different places around the country, not concentrated in one city like New York or Washington, D.C., makes a huge difference in our ability to understand misinformation that might be affecting your neighborhood. Remote work also keeps our schedules flexible and our overhead low, so we can track misinformation around the clock and dedicate more resources to it. As Snopes grows, we aspire to have more people in more places. I can’t wait to report back to you when we splashdown somewhere new. — Vinny Green Next time, you’ll hear from another member of the Snopes team about a unique aspect of working here that you might find interesting. Do you want us to cover something specific? Write to us here! Snopes-tionary Speak like an insider! Each newsletter, we’ll explain a term or piece of fact-checking lingo that we use on the Snopes team. False Premise: When an argument (valid or not) is based on an assumption or incorrect statement. Example: "Should Joe Biden and his son be investigated for their corrupt business dealings in Ukraine?" However you answer this question, it requires accepting as fact that both Joe Biden and his son engaged in "corrupt business dealings" in Ukraine, despite a lack of evidence of such. It also glosses over an important distinction: Hunter Biden engaged in business in Ukraine as a private citizen, whereas the former vice president represented the U.S. government in his dealings with Ukraine. Conflating the two activities — or incorrectly suggesting the Bidens (father and son) did business in Ukraine together — makes this a false premise. Sources: The Associated Press; The New York Times; Wikipedia. 3. In Case You Missed It The latest news and fact checks on Snopes.com. While climate scientists and fire experts affirmed that global warming played a role in the Australian wildfires that captured the world’s attention earlier this month, climate change deniers floated an alternative explanation based on reports of arson arrests. The drone strike that killed Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani prompted fears about war, as well as a spate of fraudulent text messages ordering draft-age Americans to report for military service. The military draft has not been in effect since 1973. Teen Vogue faced criticism for posting an item that was indistinguishable from a news article but was in fact a piece of “sponsored content” — an advertisement — paid for by Facebook. The publishing comedy of errors climaxed with the ad’s deletion. In one of the weirder fact checks we've investigated in recent memory, a viral photograph appears to reveal a white horse staring longingly out of a third-story apartment window, as if wishing to join passersby below. Is that you, Mr. Ed? We investigated the story of a young Mexican boy’s death at the hands of his abusive mother that was apparently repurposed as propaganda against the LGBTQ community — a case of tragedy compounded by misinformation. Have a story tip? Send it here! Snopesing 101 Fact-check like a pro! Every newsletter, we’ll let you peek behind the curtain and see some of the ways we check shady information so you can check dubious claims yourself. How to Practice Safe Sharing On Jan. 15, the morning after a seemingly contentious moment between candidates Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders in a Democratic primary debate, Twitter users awoke to find #NeverWarren was the top trending topic. It appeared as though Sanders supporters, unhappy with the exchange, were now turning on Warren en masse. But if you take a closer look at the topic itself, the hashtag was not driven by unhappy progressives turning on Warren, but mostly by people specifically posting to reject the idea. This is a prime example of the shortcomings of the trending topics algorithm, and how disinformation can flourish on Twitter. The algorithm makes no value judgement on whether people are for or against a topic; it only knows that people are using #NeverWarren. If you want to engage on a topic without amplifying misunderstanding, it’s better to screenshot the original message rather than retweet it, or you can avoid using the hashtag. 4. Snopes-worthy Reads What Team Snopes is reading across the web. Trump Is Running Hundreds of Facebook Ads Praising Himself for the Killing Of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani Alex Kantrowitz, Buzzfeed News ‘When Money Is Offered, We Listen’: Foundation Funding and Nonprofit Journalism Jacob Nelson and Patrick Ferrucci, Columbia Journalism Review #ReleaseTheJJCut: “Star Wars” Misinformation Hell Is The New Future of Everything Ryan Broderick, Buzzfeed News YouTube Overhauls Advertising, Data Collection on Kids Content Greg Bensinger and Tony Romm, The Washington Post Facebook’s Refusal to Fact-Check Political Ads Is Reckless Emily Bell, The Guardian Have any recommended reads? Submit them here. The Pets of Snopes It’s true: The Snopes “team” was once just two people and a cat. Twenty- five years later, we have more humans and more cats (and even some dogs) than at our once-humble beginnings.
Recommended publications
  • IN AMERICAN POLITICS TODAY, EVEN FACT-CHECKERS ARE VIEWED THROUGH PARTISAN LENSES by David C

    IN AMERICAN POLITICS TODAY, EVEN FACT-CHECKERS ARE VIEWED THROUGH PARTISAN LENSES by David C

    IN AMERICAN POLITICS TODAY, EVEN FACT-CHECKERS ARE VIEWED THROUGH PARTISAN LENSES by David C. Barker, American University What can be done about the “post-truth” era in American politics? Many hope that beefed-up fact-checking by reputable nonpartisan organizations like Fact Checker, PolitiFact, FactCheck.org, and Snopes can equip citizens with the tools needed to identify lies, thus reducing the incentive politicians have to propagate untruths. Unfortunately, as revealed by research I have done with colleagues, fact-checking organizations have not provided a cure-all to misinformation. Fact-checkers cannot prevent the politicization of facts, because they themselves are evaluated through a partisan lens. Partisan Biases and Trust of Fact Checkers in the 2016 Election In May of 2016, just a couple of weeks before the California Democratic primary, my colleagues and I conducted an experiment that exposed a representative sample of Californians to the statement: “Nonpartisan fact-checking organizations like PolitiFact rate controversial candidate statements for truthfulness.” We also exposed one randomized half of the sample to the following statement and image: “Each presidential candidate's current PolitiFact average truthfulness score is placed on the scale below.” The Politifact image validated the mainstream narrative about Donald Trump’s disdain for facts, and also reinforced Bernie Sanders’s tell-it-like-it-is reputation. But it contradicted conventional wisdom by revealing that Clinton had been the most accurate candidate overall (though the difference between the Clinton and Sanders ratings was not statistically significant). What did we expect to find? Some observers presume that Republicans are the most impervious to professional fact-checking.
  • Starr Forum: Russia's Information War on America

    Starr Forum: Russia's Information War on America

    MIT Center for Intnl Studies | Starr Forum: Russia’s Information War on America CAROL Welcome everyone. We're delighted that so many people could join us today. Very SAIVETZ: excited that we have such a timely topic to discuss, and we have two experts in the field to discuss it. But before I do that, I'm supposed to tell you that this is an event that is co-sponsored by the Center for International Studies at MIT, the Security Studies program at MIT, and MIT Russia. I should also introduce myself. My name is Carol Saivetz. I'm a senior advisor at the Security Studies program at MIT, and I co-chair a seminar, along with my colleague Elizabeth Wood, whom we will meet after the talk. And we co-chair a seminar series called Focus on Russia. And this is part of that seminar series as well. I couldn't think of a better topic to talk about in the lead-up to the US presidential election, which is now only 40 days away. We've heard so much in 2016 about Russian attempts to influence the election then, and we're hearing again from the CIA and from the intelligence community that Russia is, again, trying to influence who shows up, where people vote. They are mimicking some of Donald Trump's talking points about Joe Biden's strength and intellectual capabilities, et cetera. And we've really brought together two experts in the field. Nina Jankowicz studies the intersection of democracy and technology in central and eastern Europe.
  • Fact Or Fiction?

    Fact Or Fiction?

    The Ins and Outs of Media Literacy 1 Part 1: Fact or Fiction? Fake News, Alternative Facts, and other False Information By Jeff Rand La Crosse Public Library 2 Goals To give you the knowledge and tools to be a better evaluator of information Make you an agent in the fight against falsehood 3 Ground rules Our focus is knowledge and tools, not individuals You may see words and images that disturb you or do not agree with your point of view No political arguments Agree 4 Historical Context “No one in this world . has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of plain people.” (H. L. Mencken, September 19, 1926) 5 What is happening now and why 6 Shift from “Old” to “New” Media Business/Professional Individual/Social Newspapers Facebook Magazines Twitter Television Websites/blogs Radio 7 News Platforms 8 Who is your news source? Professional? Personal? Educated Trained Experienced Supervised With a code of ethics https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp 9 Social Media & News 10 Facebook & Fake News 11 Veles, Macedonia 12 Filtering Based on: Creates filter bubbles Your location Previous searches Previous clicks Previous purchases Overall popularity 13 Echo chamber effect 14 Repetition theory Coke is the real thing. Coke is the real thing. Coke is the real thing. Coke is the real thing. Coke is the real thing. 15 Our tendencies Filter bubbles: not going outside of your own beliefs Echo chambers: repeating whatever you agree with to the exclusion of everything else Information avoidance: just picking what you agree with and ignoring everything else Satisficing: stopping when the first result agrees with your thinking and not researching further Instant gratification: clicking “Like” and “Share” without thinking (Dr.
  • Disinformation, and Influence Campaigns on Twitter 'Fake News'

    Disinformation, and Influence Campaigns on Twitter 'Fake News'

    Disinformation, ‘Fake News’ and Influence Campaigns on Twitter OCTOBER 2018 Matthew Hindman Vlad Barash George Washington University Graphika Contents Executive Summary . 3 Introduction . 7 A Problem Both Old and New . 9 Defining Fake News Outlets . 13 Bots, Trolls and ‘Cyborgs’ on Twitter . 16 Map Methodology . 19 Election Data and Maps . 22 Election Core Map Election Periphery Map Postelection Map Fake Accounts From Russia’s Most Prominent Troll Farm . 33 Disinformation Campaigns on Twitter: Chronotopes . 34 #NoDAPL #WikiLeaks #SpiritCooking #SyriaHoax #SethRich Conclusion . 43 Bibliography . 45 Notes . 55 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study is one of the largest analyses to date on how fake news spread on Twitter both during and after the 2016 election campaign. Using tools and mapping methods from Graphika, a social media intelligence firm, we study more than 10 million tweets from 700,000 Twitter accounts that linked to more than 600 fake and conspiracy news outlets. Crucially, we study fake and con- spiracy news both before and after the election, allowing us to measure how the fake news ecosystem has evolved since November 2016. Much fake news and disinformation is still being spread on Twitter. Consistent with other research, we find more than 6.6 million tweets linking to fake and conspiracy news publishers in the month before the 2016 election. Yet disinformation continues to be a substantial problem postelection, with 4.0 million tweets linking to fake and conspiracy news publishers found in a 30-day period from mid-March to mid-April 2017. Contrary to claims that fake news is a game of “whack-a-mole,” more than 80 percent of the disinformation accounts in our election maps are still active as this report goes to press.
  • The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy on the Internet

    The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy on the Internet

    GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works Faculty Scholarship 2007 The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy on the Internet Daniel J. Solove George Washington University Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/faculty_publications Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Solove, Daniel J., The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy on the Internet (October 24, 2007). The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy on the Internet, Yale University Press (2007); GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper 2017-4; GWU Legal Studies Research Paper 2017-4. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2899125 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/ abstract=2899125 The Future of Reputation Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/ abstract=2899125 This page intentionally left blank Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/ abstract=2899125 The Future of Reputation Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy on the Internet Daniel J. Solove Yale University Press New Haven and London To Papa Nat A Caravan book. For more information, visit www.caravanbooks.org Copyright © 2007 by Daniel J. Solove. All rights reserved. This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, including illustrations, in any form (beyond that copying permitted by Sections 107 and 108 of the U.S.
  • Covid-19, Free Speech, Hate Speech: Implications for Journalism Teaching

    Covid-19, Free Speech, Hate Speech: Implications for Journalism Teaching

    COVID-19, FREE SPEECH, NEWS REPORTING 1 Running head: COVID-19, FREE SPEECH, NEWS REPORTING Covid-19, Free Speech, Hate Speech: Implications for Journalism Teaching Jerry Crawford1, Anastasia Kononova2, Mia Moody-Ramirez3 and Carolyn Bronstein4 Abstract The essay stems from conversations and research from AEJMC’s “Recommended EthicaL ProfessionaL Freedom & ResponsibiLity GuideLines.” It is from this perspective that we address the handling of free speech during the Covid-19 pandemic and how threats to free speech, particularly during raciaLLy charged periods, may affect teaching in journaLism and mass communication programs. Further, we discuss instances in which free speech is used during a crisis to contribute to raciaL and ethnic stereotypes and exacerbate sociopoliticaL divisions. We incLude background and context on the pandemic and how the media covered it; implications of misinformation and free speech; sourcing and citizen journaLism; and various types of hate speech. 1 Associate Professor at William Allen White School of Journalism and Mass Communication, The University of Kansas 2 Assistant Professor in the Department of Advertising + Public Relations, Michigan State University 3 Professor in the Department of Journalism, PuBlic Relations & New Media, Baylor University 4 Professor of Media Studies in the College of Communication, DePaul University COVID-19, FREE SPEECH, NEWS REPORTING 2 The year into the current Covid-19 pandemic has brought irreversible changes to the globaL community. This pandemic presents an important opportunity for journaLism and communication educators to consider the interplay among misinformation, free speech, hate speech and cLassroom teaching – whether in-person or virtuaL. The pandemic is not only a heaLth concern, but it is aLso a politicaLLy divisive topic that has been debated from various perspectives.
  • Countering False Information on Social Media in Disasters and Emergencies, March 2018

    Countering False Information on Social Media in Disasters and Emergencies, March 2018

    Countering False Information on Social Media in Disasters and Emergencies Social Media Working Group for Emergency Services and Disaster Management March 2018 Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 2 Motivations .................................................................................................................................... 4 Problem ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Causes and Spread ................................................................................................................... 6 Incorrect Information .............................................................................................................. 6 Insufficient Information ........................................................................................................... 7 Opportunistic Disinformation .................................................................................................. 8 Outdated Information ............................................................................................................. 8 Case Studies ............................................................................................................................... 10
  • Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online Alice Marwick and Rebecca Lewis CONTENTS

    Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online Alice Marwick and Rebecca Lewis CONTENTS

    Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online Alice Marwick and Rebecca Lewis CONTENTS Executive Summary ....................................................... 1 What Techniques Do Media Manipulators Use? ....... 33 Understanding Media Manipulation ............................ 2 Participatory Culture ........................................... 33 Who is Manipulating the Media? ................................. 4 Networks ............................................................. 34 Internet Trolls ......................................................... 4 Memes ................................................................. 35 Gamergaters .......................................................... 7 Bots ...................................................................... 36 Hate Groups and Ideologues ............................... 9 Strategic Amplification and Framing ................. 38 The Alt-Right ................................................... 9 Why is the Media Vulnerable? .................................... 40 The Manosphere .......................................... 13 Lack of Trust in Media ......................................... 40 Conspiracy Theorists ........................................... 17 Decline of Local News ........................................ 41 Influencers............................................................ 20 The Attention Economy ...................................... 42 Hyper-Partisan News Outlets ............................. 21 What are the Outcomes? ..........................................
  • Snopes Digest

    Snopes Digest

    View in Your Browser MEMBERS ONLY Snopes Digest April 28, 2020 • Issue #9 1 2 Behind the Snopes Doreen Marchionni, vice president of editorial, explains why our investigations share a particular theme. 3 In Case You Missed It The most popular and most important stories on Snopes.com lately. 4 Snopes-worthy Reads Good stories we’ve shared amongst ourselves recently. Issue #9 edited by Brandon Echter and Bond Huberman 1. Misinformation at Scale brandonechter, we here at Snopes have sussed out thousands of dubious claims, some shared innocuously and others pushed for more nefarious reasons. But some of the most puzzling we’ve seen are those distributed by practitioners who know how to make it seem like there’s a crowd where there is none. Whether it’s fake accounts inflating Facebook groups or outlets creating new accounts to get around bans, the use of bots, automation, and impersonation for the sake of fraud is widespread on the internet. It’s called coordinated inauthentic behavior, and you don’t have to look far for examples. In this issue of the Snopes Digest, we’re shining a light on the tactics employed to push political agendas, scam unsuspecting users, and manipulate people — and until the platforms hosting this activity put a stop to it, Snopes will be there to track them down. Stay vigilant, Team Snopes We Want to Hear from You What have you experienced during the coronavirus pandemic? How are you holding up? We want to hear how our readers are living through this crisis. Tell Us Your Story Snopes-tionary Speak like an insider! Each newsletter, we’ll explain a term or piece of fact- checking lingo that we use on the Snopes team.
  • Resources Compiled by Nicole A. Cooke, for the Fake News Workshop Presented at the Ischool at the University of Illinois - February 1, 2017

    Resources Compiled by Nicole A. Cooke, for the Fake News Workshop Presented at the Ischool at the University of Illinois - February 1, 2017

    Resources compiled by Nicole A. Cooke, for the Fake News Workshop presented at the iSchool at the University of Illinois - February 1, 2017 Media Matters for America http://mediamatters.org Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media. The News Literacy Project (NLP) http://www.thenewsliteracyproject.org/ The News Literacy Project (NLP) is a nonpartisan national education nonprofit that works with educators and journalists to teach middle school and high school students how to sort fact from fiction in the digital age. NLP provides these students with the essential sKills they need to become smart, active consumers of news and information and engaged, informed citizens. Center for News Literacy http://www.centerfornewsliteracy.org/ News Literacy is a curriculum developed at Stony BrooK University in New York over the past decade. It is designed to help students develop critical thinking sKills in order to judge the reliability and credibility of information, whether it comes via print, television or the Internet. This is a particularly important sKill in the Digital Age, as everyone struggles to deal with information overload and the difficulty in determining the authenticity of reports. In the Stony BrooK model, students are taught to evaluate information primarily by analyzing news as well as new forms of information that are often mistaKen for journalism. Snopes http://www.snopes.com/info/aboutus.asp The snopes.com website was founded by David MiKKelson, who lives and worKs in the Los Angeles area.
  • Deception Detection and Rumor Debunking for Social Media Victoria L

    Deception Detection and Rumor Debunking for Social Media Victoria L

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Scholarship@Western Western University Scholarship@Western FIMS Publications Information & Media Studies (FIMS) Faculty 2017 Deception Detection and Rumor Debunking for Social Media Victoria L. Rubin Western University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/fimspub Part of the Library and Information Science Commons Citation of this paper: Rubin, V. L. (2017). Deception Detection and Rumor Debunking for Social Media. In Sloan, L. & Quan-Haase, A. (Eds.) (2017) The SAGE Handbook of Social Media Research Methods, London: SAGE. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/the-sage-handbook-of- social-media-research-methods/book245370 DECEPTION DETECTION AND RUMOR DEBUNKING FOR SOCIAL MEDIA Citation: Rubin, V. L. (2017). Deception Detection and Rumor Debunking for Social Media. In Sloan, L. & Quan-Haase, A. (Eds.) (2017) The SAGE Handbook of Social Media Research Methods, London: SAGE. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/the-sage-handbook-of-social-media- research-methods/book245370 Abstract The main premise of this chapter is that the time is ripe for more extensive research and development of social media tools that filter out intentionally deceptive information such as deceptive memes, rumors and hoaxes, fake news or other fake posts, tweets and fraudulent profiles. Social media users’ awareness of intentional manipulation of online content appears to be relatively low, while the reliance on unverified information (often obtained from strangers) is at an all-time high. I argue there is need for content verification, systematic fact-checking and filtering of social media streams.
  • Rumor Detection on Social Media: Datasets, Methods and Opportunities

    Rumor Detection on Social Media: Datasets, Methods and Opportunities

    Rumor Detection on Social Media: Datasets, Methods and Opportunities Quanzhi Li, Qiong Zhang, Luo Si, Yingchi Liu Alibaba Group, US Bellevue, WA, USA {quanzhi.li, qz.zhang, luo.si, yingchi.liu}@alibaba-inc.com Abstract 2017a; Cao et al., 2018). The focus of this study is rumor on social media, not fake news. There are Social media platforms have been used for also different definitions for rumor detection. In information and news gathering, and they are very valuable in many applications. However, some studies, rumor detection is defined as they also lead to the spreading of rumors and determining if a story or online post is a rumor or fake news. Many efforts have been taken to non-rumor (i.e. a real story, a news article), and detect and debunk rumors on social media by the task of determining the veracity of a rumor analyzing their content and social context (true, false or unverified) is defined as rumor using machine learning techniques. This paper gives an overview of the recent studies verification (Zubiaga et al., 2016; Kochkina et al., in the rumor detection field. It provides a 2018). But in this survey paper, as well as in (Ma comprehensive list of datasets used for rumor et al., 2016; Cao et al., 2018; Shu et al, 2017; Zhou detection, and reviews the important studies et al., 2018), rumor detection is defined as based on what types of information they determining the veracity value of a rumor. This exploit and the approaches they take. And more importantly, we also present several means it is the same as rumor verification defined new directions for future research.