It is important to be clear about how rare this behavior is on social platforms: The vast majority of Facebook users in our data did not share any articles from fake news domains in 2016 at all ( Fig. Visits to Facebook appear to be much more common than other platforms before visits to fake news articles in web consumption data, suggesting a powerful role for the social network ( 3), but what is the role of social transmission-in particular, social sharing-in the spread of this pernicious form of false political content? Here, we provide important new evidence complementing the small but growing body of literature on the fake news phenomenon. Some of the earliest journalistic accounts of fake news highlighted its popularity on social media, especially Facebook ( 7).
While evidence is growing on the prevalence ( 3), believability ( 2), and resistance to corrections ( 4, 5) of fake news during the 2016 campaign, less is known about the mechanisms behind its spread ( 6). Some have gone so far as to assert that such content had a persuasive impact that could have affected the election outcome, although the best evidence suggests that these claims are farfetched ( 2). Scholars and commentators have raised concerns about the implications of fake news for the quality of democratic discourse, as well as the prevalence of misinformation more generally ( 1). presidential election was the spread and possible influence of “fake news”-false or misleading content intentionally dressed up to look like news articles, often for the purpose of generating ad revenue. One of the most discussed phenomena in the aftermath of the 2016 U.S.
0 kommentar(er)
