Search

In this special issue 'Fact or Fake: Information, Misinformation, and Disinformation via Social Media', the Journal of Strategic Marketing presents a collection of papers that delve into various topics aimed at gaining a comprehensive understanding of the impacts of fake news on social media. The objective of this special issue is to enhance our comprehension of marketing theory and practice concerning solutions, prevention, and the effects of fake news propagated through social media platforms. The topics covered within the special issue include, but are not limited to (1) Organizational and regulatory strategies to counter the dissemination of false news on social media; (2) The influence of fake news on social media on consumer behavior; (3) The correlation between social media fake news, consumer perceptions of credibility and trustworthiness, and their self-efficacy in relation to purchasing intentions; (4) The phenomenon of an 'infodemic' characterized by disinformation and misinformation in the digital age; and (5) Perceptions of credibility surrounding disinformation and intentions to share such content across social media platforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines journalistic coverage of false information through a qualitative textual analysis of news about four popular false information cases during the 2016 and 2020 US presidential elections: The false claims that (1) the Pope endorsed Donald Trump; (2) Hillary Clinton and her campaign manager ran a pedophilia ring in a pizza shop; (3) the 2020 election was fraudulent and stolen; and (4) liberal politicians and celebrities were Satan worshippers and pedophiles. The analysis identified three dimensions of correction of false information in news coverage. The first dimension examined emphasis on the correct rather than false information. This nuanced past research by considering different practices, such as elaborating on correct information and avoiding the inclusion of incorrect information. The second dimension referred to the tone used to correct false information. The adoption of an assertive tone demonstrated journalists' use of their voice to authoritatively correct false information. The third dimension entailed the inclusion of sources, which were used to frame correct information consistently with a diversity of audiences' worldviews. These findings offer a framework to assess journalistic reporting on false information and illuminate strategies to stem its spread. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is commonly recognised that the publication of false information can be harmful to the public sphere. The Online Safety Act 2023 places statutory responsibilities on regulated services to prevent the publication of certain false information. This article interrogates the regime's compatibility with established free speech law and theory. I argue that there is a disconnect between the legislation and the legal and theoretical principles underpinning free speech, which could have insidious and long-lasting implications for the right and the public sphere. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rumor is defined as false information under the framework of Chinese laws, but in practice, law enforcement agencies tend to incorporate unverified information into the regulation of rumor, which broadens the range of enforcement. Unverified information may be subjectively and honestly believed to be true, and it could be false, inaccurate or accurate in an objective manner. In contrast, rumor, circulated with subjective malice, will inevitably lead to objective falsehood. As an important part in the marketplace of ideas, the existence of unverified information can promote the discussion and exchange of thoughts from which facts and truth are derived. Common law and most civil law systems adopt a subjective criterion to judge whether speech can be regarded as legal. This article suggests that China law should adopt the following approach. It should be determined whether the speech is unverified information before further judgment is made. Specifically speaking, speech should be presumed as unverified information rather than rumor if it is not targeted at a specific subject, or it is aimed at a specific subject with public interest involved. Speech deemed as rumor should be curbed, and the rumormongers are punishable, while the dissemination of unverified information shall be restricted if there is objective and obvious inaccuracy but the speaker should not be punished. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research shows that high levels of media multitasking (either situationally induced or chronic) may be associated with decreased cognitive function. Since cognitive capacity is required for efficient correction of one's judgment after learning that the basis of the judgement is no longer valid, we expected that high levels of media multitasking would decrease one's ability to adequately update one's beliefs. We ran two studies in which participants were asked to form an impression of a target person based on their profile on a professional networking site. The profile contained either neutral information (control condition) or a negative comment which was later disproven (false-information conditions). We additionally manipulated media multitasking demands (in Study 1) or measured participants' frequency of media multitasking (Study 2) and tested whether the level of media multitasking is related to the degree to which the initial attitudes were adjusted after learning that the negative comment was false. We found a significant but rather small effect of the manipulation in Study 1 indicating that participants in both multitasking conditions had more negative attitudes after the correction compared to the baseline, but not to the mono-tasking condition. Crucially, media multitasking demands did not impact attitude adjustment. The results of Study 2 showed that the relationship between media-multitasking frequency measured with a scale and attitude adjustment was non-significant. Overall, the findings provide no evidence that media multitasking – whether experimentally manipulated or chronic – plays a role in correction after misinformation. The study data and code are available at [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Students frequently make errors when learning, but generating errors can enhance subsequent learning from corrective feedback (i.e. the testing effect). There have also been cases in which errors generated by someone can be shared with others. Notably, it has been found that listening to errors provided by someone could hinder the other's subsequent learning from corrective feedback. In this study, we investigated whether the learning of someone who knows the correct answers beforehand is impaired by perceiving another's error (i.e. retroactive interference). Thus, two experiments were conducted: a simulated question-and-answer situation (Experiment 1) and a mutual question-and-answer situation in which 2 students quizzed one another (Experiment 2). The results showed that the cued-recall performance of the tester who had received incorrect answers a week prior was not different from that in the case of learning with only reading (control condition), showing no negative effects. Furthermore, the memory performance of participants who took a test was better than the control condition, demonstrating the testing effect. We, thereby, discuss the efficacy of the reciprocal testing procedure as a learning method. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social media has helped intensify the velocity and volume of information shared on the Internet. A flood of information from a multitude of viewpoints and in a wide array of mediums is unleashed on the public daily. Unfortunately, the information falls on a wide spectrum of veracity—from completely true, to somewhat true but misleading, to utterly false. While we may partially blame hostile foreign or domestic actors for seeding false information into the public consciousness, information users need to understand their own roles, often played unwittingly, in sharing that information. In this study we attempted to advance our understanding of the phenomena of information sharing, especially when false information is involved, and demonstrate that information literacy is the best line of defense against false information. After a historical overview of how librarians dealt with propaganda and false information, we present a conceptual framework for understanding why people share information, especially false information, using examples from social media and other digital communication channels. We also discuss the consequences of sharing false information. We conclude with literacy strategies for equipping information users with the knowledge and skills to assess, process, and respond to shared information effectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]