Political Fact-Checking Efforts are Constrained by Deficiencies in Coverage, Speed, and Reach

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.13280v1
• Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2024 19:15:08 GMT
• Title: Political Fact-Checking Efforts are Constrained by Deficiencies in Coverage, Speed, and Reach
• Authors: Morgan Wack, Kayla Duskin, Damian Hodel,
• Abstract summary: This study provides the most comprehensive assessment to date of the real-world limitations faced by political fact-checking efforts. We find that fact-checks as currently developed and distributed are severely inhibited in election contexts by constraints on their coverage, speed, and reach. We provide empirical evidence which runs contrary to the assumption that misinformation is politically biased against the political right.
• Score: 0.0
• License:
• Abstract: Fact-checking has been promoted as a key method for combating political misinformation. Comparing the spread of election-related misinformation narratives along with their relevant political fact-checks, this study provides the most comprehensive assessment to date of the real-world limitations faced by political fact-checking efforts. To examine barriers to impact, this study extends recent work from laboratory and experimental settings to the wider online information ecosystem present during the 2022 U.S. midterm elections. From analyses conducted within this context, we find that fact-checks as currently developed and distributed are severely inhibited in election contexts by constraints on their i. coverage, ii. speed, and, iii. reach. Specifically, we provide evidence that fewer than half of all prominent election-related misinformation narratives were fact-checked. Within the subset of fact-checked claims, we find that the median fact-check was released a full four days after the initial appearance of a narrative. Using network analysis to estimate user partisanship and dynamics of information spread, we additionally find evidence that fact-checks make up less than 1.2\% of narrative conversations and that even when shared, fact-checks are nearly always shared within,rather than between, partisan communities. Furthermore, we provide empirical evidence which runs contrary to the assumption that misinformation moderation is politically biased against the political right. In full, through this assessment of the real-world influence of political fact-checking efforts, our findings underscore how limitations in coverage, speed, and reach necessitate further examination of the potential use of fact-checks as the primary method for combating the spread of political misinformation.

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. Our analysis reveals that community notes cite fact-checking sources up to five times more than previously reported.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-19T22:26:39Z)
• On the Use of Proxies in Political Ad Targeting [49.61009579554272]
  We show that major political advertisers circumvented mitigations by targeting proxy attributes. Our findings have crucial implications for the ongoing discussion on the regulation of political advertising.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-18T17:15:13Z)
• Correcting misinformation on social media with a large language model [14.69780455372507]
  Real-world misinformation, often multimodal, can be misleading using diverse tactics like conflating correlation with causation. Such misinformation is severely understudied, challenging to address, and harms various social domains, particularly on social media. We propose MUSE, an LLM augmented with access to and credibility evaluation of up-to-date information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-17T10:59:09Z)
• Whose Side Are You On? Investigating the Political Stance of Large Language Models [56.883423489203786]
  We investigate the political orientation of Large Language Models (LLMs) across a spectrum of eight polarizing topics. Our investigation delves into the political alignment of LLMs across a spectrum of eight polarizing topics, spanning from abortion to LGBTQ issues. The findings suggest that users should be mindful when crafting queries, and exercise caution in selecting neutral prompt language.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-15T04:02:24Z)
• Quantifying Media Influence on Covid-19 Mask-Wearing Beliefs [0.8192907805418583]
  This study contributes a dataset of U.S. news media stories, annotated according to Howard 2020's Face Mask Perception Scale for their statements regarding Covid-19 mask-wearing. We demonstrate fine-grained correlations between media messaging and empirical opinion polling data from a Gallup survey conducted during the same period. We also demonstrate that the data can be used for quantitative analysis of pro- and anti-mask sentiment throughout the period.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-06T13:09:40Z)
• 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)
• Missing Counter-Evidence Renders NLP Fact-Checking Unrealistic for Misinformation [67.69725605939315]
  Misinformation emerges in times of uncertainty when credible information is limited. This is challenging for NLP-based fact-checking as it relies on counter-evidence, which may not yet be available.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-25T09:40:48Z)
• Correcting public opinion trends through Bayesian data assimilation [8.406968279478347]
  Measuring public opinion is a key focus during democratic elections. Traditional survey polling remains the most popular estimation technique. Twitter opinion mining has attempted to combat these issues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-29T11:39:56Z)
• The Role of Context in Detecting Previously Fact-Checked Claims [27.076320857009655]
  We focus on claims made in a political debate, where context really matters. We study the impact of modeling the context of the claim both on the source side, as well as on the target side, in the fact-checking explanation document.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-15T12:39:37Z)
• 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.

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