Suchergebnisse

In recent years the term fake news has come to the forefront of the media and public debate. Constructed news that does not actually respond to reality can have an impact and create complications on the political, economic or social life of individuals, because it is often fabricated in order to deceive the public. But in order to perceive the problem, we must first understand the concept of fake news, so that we can then devise strategies to limit it. In this article we can see three categories about the Harm and Falseness of news, which in our opinion help to have a clearer picture of the subject. These categories are Malinformation, Disinformation and Misinformation, which have an affinity between them, but also some basic differences that create different treatment needs for each one of them.

From misleading news articles around elections in Brazil and the United States to mob lynchings fueled by false social media messages in India to made-up stories about COVID-19 vaccination, a deluge of disinformation and misinformation is affecting various aspects of citizens' lives around the world. Although there is an increasing number of research papers dealing with disinformation or misinformation, a majority of these have focused on the United States. This Special Section on comparative approaches to mis/disinformation features conceptual and data-informed articles with international and global perspectives on the prevalence, impact, and diffusion of mis/disinformation in different countries. Articles selected for the Special Section provide new theoretical and empirical contributions to existing bodies of knowledge whether focusing on one country or offering comparative perspectives involving multiple countries. The articles, individually and collectively, offer important scholarly and policy implications for studying and combating mis/disinformation around the world.

The discursive construction of a populist divide between the 'good' people and 'corrupt' elites can conceptually be linked to disinformation. More specifically, (right-wing) populists are not only attributing blame to the political elites, but increasingly vent anti-media sentiments in which the mainstream press is scapegoated for not representing the people. In an era of post-truth relativism, 'fake news' is increasingly politicized and used as a label to delegitimize political opponents or the press. To better understand the affinity between disinformation and populism, this article conceptualizes two relationships between these concepts: (1) blame attributions to the dishonest media as part of the corrupt elites that mislead the people; and (2) the expression of populist boundaries in a people-centric, anti-expert, and evidence-free way. The results of a comparative qualitative content analysis in the US and Netherlands indicate that the political leaders Donald Trump and Geert Wilders blame legacy media in populist ways by regarding them as part of the corrupt and lying establishment. Compared to left-wing populist and mainstream politicians, these politicians are the most central players in the discursive construction of populist disinformation. Both politicians bypassed empirical evidence and expert knowledge whilst prioritizing the people's truth and common sense at the center stage of honesty and reality. These expressions resonated with public opinion on Facebook, although citizens were more likely to frame mis- and disinformation in terms of ideological cleavages. These findings have important implications for our understanding of the role of populist discourse in a post-factual era.

Bilgi, devlet-vatandaş ilişkisinde önemli unsurlardan biridir. Bu ilişkide devlet bilginin hem toplayıcısı, hem üreticisi, hem de dağıtıcısı konumundadır. Bu durum devlet kaynaklı bilgilerde şeffaflık ve doğruluğu halk açısından önemli bir hale getirmektedir. Dezenformasyon ise bilginin kasıtlı şekilde yanıltma, yönlendirme, yanlış bilgi verme amacıyla kullanılmasını ifade eden bir terimdir. Dezenformasyon çabaları ve faaliyetleri gerek demokratik gerekse antidemokratik devletlerde görülmekle birlikte, bu faaliyetler totaliter ülkelerde daha sistematik bir biçimde yürütülmektedir. Totaliter devletlerde dezenformasyon faaliyetlerinin en açık tezahürlerinin Sovyetler Birliği'nde bulunduğunu söylemek mümkündür. Bununla birlikte Sovyetler Birliği'nin dağılması dezenformasyonu siyaset sahnesinden silmemiştir. Burada demokratik devletlere düşen görev dezenformasyonla legal yollardan mücadele edebilmektir. Bu makale dezenformasyon faaliyetlerinin anlamını, yürütülme biçimini, devletler tarafından gerek kendi vatandaşlarıyla gerek diğer devletlerle olan ilişkilerinde nasıl kullanıldığını incelemektedir. ; Information is one of the important elements in the state-citizen relationship. In this relationship, the state is both a collector, producer, and distributor of information. This makes transparency and accuracy in information from state important for the public. Disinformation is a term that refers to the use of information for deliberate misleading, directing, and misinformation. Although disinformation efforts and activities are seen in both democratic and antidemocratic states, these activities are carried out more systematically in totalitarian countries. It is possible to say that the most obvious manifestations of disinformation activities in totalitarian states existed in the Soviet Union. However, the disintegration of the Soviet Union did not delete the disinformation from the political scene. The task of democratic states is to fight against disinformation legally. This article examines the meaning of disinformation activities, how they are carried out, and how they are used by states in their relations with their own citizens and other states.

EU policy considers disinformation to be harmful content, rather than illegal content. However, EU member states have recently been making disinformation illegal. This article discusses the definitions that form the basis of EU disinformation policy, and analyses national legislation in EU member states applicable to the definitions of disinformation, in light of freedom of expression and the proposed Digital Services Act. The article discusses the perils of defining disinformation in EU legislation, and including provisions on online platforms being required to remove illegal content, which may end up being applicable to overbroad national laws criminalising false news and false information.

Proceedings of a conference sponsored jointly by the Heritage Foundation and the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, held in Washington, D.C., May 16, 1984. Soviet "active measures" in the United States and elsewhere in the West.

A society with credible institutions would allow ordinary citizens to interrogate unexplained wealth. Seeing corrupt public officials placed behind bars provides closure to the story of accountability. But this is not the Philippine society. We turn to myths, urban legends, and rumours to make sense of suspicious situations because we cannot count on our institutions … Continued