Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Publishers/sources (Disinformation)


Staender, Anna; Humprecht, Edda (2021). Publishers/sources (Disinformation). Zürich: Hope.

Abstract

Recent research has mainly used two approaches to identify publishers or sources of disinformation: First, alternative media are identified as potential publishers of disinformation. Second, potential publishers of disinformation are identified via fact-checking websites. Samples created using those approaches can partly overlap. However, the two approaches differ in terms of validity and comprehensiveness of the identified population. Sampling of alternative media outlets is theory-driven and allows for cross-national comparison. However, researchers face the challenge to identify misinforming content published by alternative media outlets. In contrast, fact-checked content facilitates the identification of a given disinformation population; however, fact-checker often have a publication bias focusing on a small range of (elite) actors or sources (e.g. individual blogs, hyper partisan news outlets, or politicians). In both approaches it is important to describe, compare and, if possible, assign the outlets to already existing categories in order to enable a temporal and spatial comparison.

Abstract

Recent research has mainly used two approaches to identify publishers or sources of disinformation: First, alternative media are identified as potential publishers of disinformation. Second, potential publishers of disinformation are identified via fact-checking websites. Samples created using those approaches can partly overlap. However, the two approaches differ in terms of validity and comprehensiveness of the identified population. Sampling of alternative media outlets is theory-driven and allows for cross-national comparison. However, researchers face the challenge to identify misinforming content published by alternative media outlets. In contrast, fact-checked content facilitates the identification of a given disinformation population; however, fact-checker often have a publication bias focusing on a small range of (elite) actors or sources (e.g. individual blogs, hyper partisan news outlets, or politicians). In both approaches it is important to describe, compare and, if possible, assign the outlets to already existing categories in order to enable a temporal and spatial comparison.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics

Altmetrics

Downloads

8 downloads since deposited on 21 May 2021
8 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Scientific Publication in Electronic Form
Communities & Collections:06 Faculty of Arts > Department of Communication and Media Research
Dewey Decimal Classification:700 Arts
Uncontrolled Keywords:Disinformation, sources, detection, alternative media, fact-checking sites
Editors:Oehmer Franziska, Kessler Sabrina Heike, Humprecht Edda, Sommer Katharina, Castro Herrero Laia
Language:English
Date:26 March 2021
Deposited On:21 May 2021 12:45
Last Modified:21 May 2021 12:45
Publisher:Hope
Series Name:DOCA - Database of Variables for Content Analysis
Number of Pages:4
ISSN:2673-8597
OA Status:Hybrid
Free access at:Official URL. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.34778/4c
Official URL:https://www.hope.uzh.ch/doca/article/view/4c/1764

Download

Hybrid Open Access

Download PDF  'Publishers/sources (Disinformation)'.
Preview
Content: Published Version
Language: English
Filetype: PDF
Size: 199kB
View at publisher
Licence: Creative Commons: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)