The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Oxford study on Polarization, Partisanship and Junk News Consumption over Social Media in the US Options
progpen
Posted: Wednesday, February 07, 2018 9:57:55 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/2/2015
Posts: 1,639
Neurons: 230,119
Location: Princeton, Minnesota, United States
The original study.
http://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/93/2018/02/Polarization-Partisanship-JunkNews.pdf

http://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/polarization-partisanship-and-junk-news/
From the Project on Computational Propaganda. They examined the distribution of the most significant sources of junk news in the three months before President Donald Trump’s first State of the Union Address. Drawing on a list of sources that consistently publish political news and information that is extremist, sensationalist, conspiratorial, masked commentary, fake news and other forms of junk news, we find that the distribution of such content is unevenly spread across the ideological spectrum. We demonstrate that (1) on Twitter, a network of Trump supporters shares the widest range of known junk news sources and circulates more junk news than all the other groups put together; (2) on Facebook, extreme hard right pages—distinct from Republican pages—share the widest range of known junk news sources and circulate more junk news than all the other audiences put together; (3) on average, the audiences for junk news on Twitter share a wider range of known junk news sources than audiences on Facebook’s public pages.

This ties into previous studies that have shown that those who rely on a belief system more heavily than data and facts tend to support conservative political viewpoints (although this is a very broad brush and there are exceptions).

Nolite te bastardes carborundorum
progpen
Posted: Wednesday, February 07, 2018 10:04:44 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/2/2015
Posts: 1,639
Neurons: 230,119
Location: Princeton, Minnesota, United States
From the article:

For a source to be labeled as junk news it must fall in
at least three of the following five domains:
• Professionalism: These outlets do not employ
the standards and best practices of professional
journalism. They refrain from providing clear
information about real authors, editors,
publishers and owners. They lack transparency,
accountability, and do not publish corrections on
debunked information.
• Style: These outlets use emotionally driven
language with emotive expressions, hyperbole,
ad hominem attacks, misleading headlines,
excessive capitalization, unsafe generalizations
and fallacies, moving images, graphic pictures
and mobilizing memes.
• Credibility: These outlets rely on false
information and conspiracy theories, which they
often employ strategically. They report without
consulting multiple sources and do not employ
fact-checking methods. Their sources are often
untrustworthy and their standards of news
production lack credibility.
• Bias: Reporting in these outlets is highly biased
and ideologically skewed, which is otherwise
described as hyper-partisan reporting. These
outlets frequently present opinion and
commentary essays as news.
• Counterfeit: These outlets mimic professional
news media. They counterfeit fonts, branding
and stylistic content strategies. Commentary and
junk content is stylistically disguised as news,

Nolite te bastardes carborundorum
FounDit
Posted: Wednesday, February 07, 2018 12:16:17 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 8,574
Neurons: 46,077
Biased news media telling us who is biased. That's rich...ROTF


A great many people will think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices. ~ William James ~
Donthailand
Posted: Wednesday, February 07, 2018 12:36:01 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 12/16/2014
Posts: 144
Neurons: 498,100
Location: Detroit, Michigan, United States
Let me guess...Fox News.
philips daughter
Posted: Wednesday, February 07, 2018 2:00:31 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/21/2017
Posts: 150
Neurons: 35,233
This is not one news network reporting. It is an Oxford study on the effects of twitter and Facebook.

Twitter and Facebook = twitface🙂🙃
FounDit
Posted: Wednesday, February 07, 2018 4:57:01 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 8,574
Neurons: 46,077
Donthailand wrote:
Let me guess...Fox News.


No, Facebook and Twitter, two very biased sources of so-called "news" and "information".

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bridaineparnell/2014/11/27/scientists-warn-about-bias-in-the-facebook-and-twitter-data-used-in-millions-of-studies/#4fa075f45de8

https://gizmodo.com/former-facebook-workers-we-routinely-suppressed-conser-1775461006

But you can also add in all the mainstream media as well. You can even include Fox News if that will help unclench your alimentary termination point.



A great many people will think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices. ~ William James ~
progpen
Posted: Thursday, February 08, 2018 9:04:31 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/2/2015
Posts: 1,639
Neurons: 230,119
Location: Princeton, Minnesota, United States
FounDit wrote:
Biased news media telling us who is biased. That's rich...ROTF


Oxford is biased media? Really? Please elaborate.

Nolite te bastardes carborundorum
progpen
Posted: Thursday, February 08, 2018 9:06:39 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/2/2015
Posts: 1,639
Neurons: 230,119
Location: Princeton, Minnesota, United States
We've seen smarmy derision without bothering to read the study, so I'd like to see an actual debate of the data and facts.

Nolite te bastardes carborundorum
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines. Copyright © 2008-2018 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.