Related papers: From alternative conceptions of honesty to alternative facts in communications by U.S. politicians

From alternative conceptions of honesty to alternative facts in communications by U.S. politicians

URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2208.10814v3
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 15:51:37 GMT
Title: From alternative conceptions of honesty to alternative facts in communications by U.S. politicians
Abstract summary: We show that politicians' conception of honesty has undergone a distinct shift. An increase of belief-speaking of 10% is associated with a decrease of 12.8 points of quality. The results support the hypothesis that the current dissemination of misinformation is in part driven by an alternative understanding of truth and honesty.
Score: 1.7292236187135732
License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Abstract: The spread of online misinformation on social media is increasingly perceived as a problem for societal cohesion and democracy. The role of political leaders in this process has attracted less research attention, even though politicians who "speak their mind" are perceived by segments of the public as authentic and honest even if their statements are unsupported by evidence. Analyzing communications by members of the U.S. Congress on Twitter between 2011 and 2022, we show that politicians' conception of honesty has undergone a distinct shift, with authentic belief-speaking that may be decoupled from evidence becoming more prominent and more differentiated from explicitly evidence-based truth seeking. We show that for Republicans - but not Democrats - an increase of belief-speaking of 10% is associated with a decrease of 12.8 points of quality (NewsGuard scoring system) in the sources shared in a tweet. Conversely, an increase in truth-seeking language is associated with an increase in quality of sources for both parties. The results support the hypothesis that the current dissemination of misinformation in political discourse is in part driven by an alternative understanding of truth and honesty that emphasizes invocation of subjective belief at the expense of reliance on evidence.

Related papers

Can Community Notes Replace Professional Fact-Checkers? [49.5332225129956]
Policy changes by Twitter/X and Meta signal a shift away from partnerships with fact-checking organisations.<n>Our analysis reveals that community notes cite fact-checking sources up to five times more than previously reported.<n>Our results show that successful community moderation relies on professional fact-checking and highlight how citizen and professional fact-checking are deeply intertwined.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-19T22:26:39Z)
Fake News Detection via Wisdom of Synthetic & Representative Crowds [0.0]
Social media companies have struggled to provide a democratically legitimate definition of "Fake News" This paper provides a novel end-to-end methodology to detect fake news on X via "wisdom of the synthetic & representative crowds"
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-08-06T12:54:41Z)
Computational analysis of US Congressional speeches reveals a shift from evidence to intuition [1.5590818387626204]
Pursuit of honest and truthful decision-making is crucial for governance and accountability in democracies. We explore a continuum of perspectives from evidence-based reasoning, rooted in ascertainable facts and data, at one end, to intuitive decisions that are driven by feelings and subjective interpretations, at the other. We analyze the linguistic traces of those contrasting perspectives in Congressional speeches from 1879 to 2022.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-12T16:17:41Z)
Older Adults' Experiences with Misinformation on Social Media [3.4606760852212806]
This study investigates how older adults in America discern, and contextualize social media misinformation. We found that 62% of the participants intending to vote Democrat saw a manipulative political purpose behind the spread of misinformation. During our interviews, we found that 63% of the participants who intended to vote Republican, were fully aware and acknowledged that Republican or conservative voices often time speak misinformation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-14T21:34:59Z)
Bias or Diversity? Unraveling Fine-Grained Thematic Discrepancy in U.S. News Headlines [63.52264764099532]
We use a large dataset of 1.8 million news headlines from major U.S. media outlets spanning from 2014 to 2022. We quantify the fine-grained thematic discrepancy related to four prominent topics - domestic politics, economic issues, social issues, and foreign affairs. Our findings indicate that on domestic politics and social issues, the discrepancy can be attributed to a certain degree of media bias.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-03-28T03:31:37Z)
Unveiling the Hidden Agenda: Biases in News Reporting and Consumption [59.55900146668931]
We build a six-year dataset on the Italian vaccine debate and adopt a Bayesian latent space model to identify narrative and selection biases. We found a nonlinear relationship between biases and engagement, with higher engagement for extreme positions. Analysis of news consumption on Twitter reveals common audiences among news outlets with similar ideological positions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-01-14T18:58:42Z)
Social media sharing by political elites: An asymmetric American exceptionalism [1.7292236187135732]
We show that from 2016 onward, members of the Republican party in the U.S. Congress have been increasingly sharing links to untrustworthy sources. The proportion of untrustworthy information posted by Republicans versus Democrats is diverging at an accelerating rate.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-07-13T16:03:47Z)
Shifting Polarization and Twitter News Influencers between two U.S. Presidential Elections [92.33485580547801]
We analyze the change of polarization between the 2016 and 2020 U.S. presidential elections. Most of the top influencers were affiliated with media organizations during both elections. 75% of the top influencers in 2020 were not present in 2016, demonstrating that such status is difficult to retain.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-11-03T20:08:54Z)
Reaching the bubble may not be enough: news media role in online political polarization [58.720142291102135]
A way of reducing polarization would be by distributing cross-partisan news among individuals with distinct political orientations. This study investigates whether this holds in the context of nationwide elections in Brazil and Canada.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-09-18T11:34:04Z)
News consumption and social media regulations policy [70.31753171707005]
We analyze two social media that enforced opposite moderation methods, Twitter and Gab, to assess the interplay between news consumption and content regulation. Our results show that the presence of moderation pursued by Twitter produces a significant reduction of questionable content. The lack of clear regulation on Gab results in the tendency of the user to engage with both types of content, showing a slight preference for the questionable ones which may account for a dissing/endorsement behavior.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-06-07T19:26:32Z)
A Survey on Predicting the Factuality and the Bias of News Media [29.032850263311342]
"The state of the art on media profiling for factuality and bias" "Political bias detection, which in the Western political landscape is about predicting left-center-right bias" "Recent advances in using different information sources and modalities"
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-03-16T11:11:54Z)
Right and left, partisanship predicts (asymmetric) vulnerability to misinformation [71.46564239895892]
We analyze the relationship between partisanship, echo chambers, and vulnerability to online misinformation by studying news sharing behavior on Twitter. We find that vulnerability to misinformation is most strongly influenced by partisanship for both left- and right-leaning users.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-10-04T01:36:14Z)

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