COVID-19 Misinformation and Disinformation on Social Networks -- The Limits of Veritistic Countermeasures

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2008.00784v1
• Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 11:25:47 GMT
• Title: COVID-19 Misinformation and Disinformation on Social Networks -- The Limits of Veritistic Countermeasures
• Authors: Andrew Buzzell
• Abstract summary: The COVID-19 pandemic has been the subject of a vast amount of misinformation. Social media platforms recently publicized some of the countermeasures they are adopting. This presents an opportunity to examine the nature of the misinformation and disinformation being produced.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic has been the subject of a vast amount of misinformation, particularly in digital information environments, and major social media platforms recently publicized some of the countermeasures they are adopting. This presents an opportunity to examine the nature of the misinformation and disinformation being produced, and the theoretical and technological paradigm used to counter it. I argue that this approach is based on a conception of misinformation as epistemic pollution that can only justify a limited and potentially inadequate response , and that some of the measures undertaken in practice outrun this. In fact, social networks manage ecological and architectural conditions that influence discourse on their platforms in ways that should motivate reconsideration of the justifications that ground epistemic interventions to combat misinformation, and the types of intervention that they warrant. The editorial role of platforms should not be framed solely as the management of epistemic pollution, but instead as managing the epistemic environment in which narratives and social epistemic processes take place. There is an element of inevitable epistemic paternalism involved in this, and exploration of the independent constraints on its justifiability can help determine proper limits of its exercise in practice.

Related papers

• MisinfoEval: Generative AI in the Era of "Alternative Facts" [50.069577397751175]
  We introduce a framework for generating and evaluating large language model (LLM) based misinformation interventions. We present (1) an experiment with a simulated social media environment to measure effectiveness of misinformation interventions, and (2) a second experiment with personalized explanations tailored to the demographics and beliefs of users. Our findings confirm that LLM-based interventions are highly effective at correcting user behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-13T18:16:50Z)
• Carthago Delenda Est: Co-opetitive Indirect Information Diffusion Model for Influence Operations on Online Social Media [6.236019068888737]
  We introduce Diluvsion, an agent-based model for contested information propagation efforts on Twitter-like social media. We account for engagement metrics in influencing stance adoption, non-social tie spreading of information, neutrality as a stance that can be spread, and themes that are analogous to media's framing effect and are symbiotic with respect to stance propagation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-02T21:15:24Z)
• Decoding Susceptibility: Modeling Misbelief to Misinformation Through a Computational Approach [61.04606493712002]
  Susceptibility to misinformation describes the degree of belief in unverifiable claims that is not observable. Existing susceptibility studies heavily rely on self-reported beliefs. We propose a computational approach to model users' latent susceptibility levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T07:22:56Z)
• Explaining by Imitating: Understanding Decisions by Interpretable Policy Learning [72.80902932543474]
  Understanding human behavior from observed data is critical for transparency and accountability in decision-making. Consider real-world settings such as healthcare, in which modeling a decision-maker's policy is challenging. We propose a data-driven representation of decision-making behavior that inheres transparency by design, accommodates partial observability, and operates completely offline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T13:06:14Z)
• Understanding the Humans Behind Online Misinformation: An Observational Study Through the Lens of the COVID-19 Pandemic [12.873747057824833]
  We conduct a large-scale observational study analyzing over 32 million COVID-19 tweets and 16 million historical timeline tweets. We focus on understanding the behavior and psychology of users disseminating misinformation during COVID-19 and its relationship with the historical inclinations towards sharing misinformation on Non-COVID domains before the pandemic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-12T16:42:53Z)
• Eliciting the Double-edged Impact of Digitalisation: a Case Study in Rural Areas [1.8707139489039097]
  This paper reports a case study about the impact of digitalisation in remote mountain areas, in the context of a system for ordinary land management and hydro-geological risk control. We highlight the higher stress due to the excess of connectivity, the partial reduction of decision-making abilities, and the risk of marginalisation for certain types of stakeholders. Our study contributes to the literature with: a set of impacts specific to the case, which can apply to similar contexts; an effective approach for impact elicitation; and a list of lessons learned from the experience.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-08T10:01:35Z)
• How can we combat online misinformation? A systematic overview of current interventions and their efficacy [4.4628294018254495]
  We develop a new hierarchical framework for understanding interventions against misinformation online. It comprises three key elements: Interventions that Prepare people to be less susceptible; Interventions that Curb the spread and effects of misinformation; and Interventions that Respond to misinformation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-22T16:59:33Z)
• Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space [62.997667081978825]
  Counterfactual explanations aim to provide to end users a set of features that need to be changed in order to achieve a desired outcome. Current approaches rarely take into account the feasibility of actions needed to achieve the proposed explanations. We present Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space (CEILS), a methodology to generate counterfactual explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-14T20:48:48Z)
• Overcoming Failures of Imagination in AI Infused System Development and Deployment [71.9309995623067]
  NeurIPS 2020 requested that research paper submissions include impact statements on "potential nefarious uses and the consequences of failure" We argue that frameworks of harms must be context-aware and consider a wider range of potential stakeholders, system affordances, as well as viable proxies for assessing harms in the widest sense.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-26T18:09:52Z)
• From Prediction to Prescription: Evolutionary Optimization of Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions in the COVID-19 Pandemic [19.477459618274025]
  Several models have been developed to predict how the COVID-19 pandemic spreads. This paper demonstrates how evolutionary AI could be used to facilitate the next step, i.e. determining most effective intervention strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-28T03:43:31Z)
• COVI White Paper [67.04578448931741]
  Contact tracing is an essential tool to change the course of the Covid-19 pandemic. We present an overview of the rationale, design, ethical considerations and privacy strategy of COVI,' a Covid-19 public peer-to-peer contact tracing and risk awareness mobile application developed in Canada.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-18T07:40:49Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.