Fact-checking initiatives in Portuguese language countries: checking methods and financing strategies

Author:

Durr Missau Lucas1ORCID,Storch Laura Strelow1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Communication Sciences, Federal University of Santa Maria , Santa Maria , RS , Brazil

Abstract

Abstract Purpose Fact-checking has been changing in recent years from an initial stage in which fact-checkers were more concerned with political discourse to a stage in which combating misinformation becomes the primary purpose. This work examines more closely the standardizing and the customizing aspects of active fact-checking outlets in Portuguese-speaking countries, focusing on the verification methods and organizational models in use. Design/methodology/approach Based on Content Analysis, we collected manually 318 posts during June 2019 from each fact-checking outlets website and then examined each post according to six general concepts: discourse, sources, context, classification, graphic representation, and financing. There were 15 active fact-checking outlets in Brazil (13) and Portugal (2). No active outlets were found in the African countries. Findings Although there is room for inventiveness in fact-checking practices, it is restricted to the classification models adopted and the graphic representation demanded by them. Only two largest Portuguese-speaking countries (Brazil and Portugal) have active fact-checking initiatives during the study period. In Mozambique, we found the outlet named Mozcheck that was inactive with no published content during the research period. From our analysis, we detected a pattern between the type of misinformation and the media to which it is most often linked: false information was circulated mainly in texts, while false contexts were mainly circulated in videos and images led to more manipulated content. In addition, in relation to the sources used to verification of the content, we noticed a large volume of posts relied only on sources came from contacts with press offices – this was especially true for political issues. Practical implications The analyzed data indicates that the standardization tendencies are related to the connection of these initiatives with traditional media. While the contrasting aspects of the fact-checking practices are related to the classification models and the graphic representation created by the outlets. Social implications It indicates that fact-checking outlets is still tied to traditional media in terms of its organizational and institutional business model. Inventiveness and innovation are restricted to the practice of fact-checking conducted by journalists and other professionals. Originality/value This is the first study to compare the practice of fact-checking in Portuguese-speaking countries and, besides looking at aspects of journalistic practice, it also seeks to analyze organizational elements of fact-checking outlets.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Reference37 articles.

1. Amazeen, Michelle. 2013. Making a difference? A critical assessment of fact-checking in 2012, vol. 0, (October), 1–40: New America Foundation. Available from: https://static.newamerica.org/attachments/10215-making-a-difference/Amazeen_-A_Critical_Assessment_of_Factchecking.4a3289cb3fcd4a8faf0d94f40ebcdc35.pdf.

2. Amazeen, Michelle. 2015. Revisiting the epistemology of fact-checking. Critical Review 27(1). 1–22.

3. Aos, Fatos. n.d. Conheça o Aos Fatos lab. https://www.aosfatos.org/aos-fatos-lab/ (accessed 24 June 2020).

4. Bardin, Laurence. 2011. Análise de conteúdo, vol. 70. São Paulo: Edições.

5. Barzilai-Nahon, Karine. 2011. Gatekeeping: A critical review. Annual Review of Information Science & Technology 43(1). 1–79. https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.2009.1440430117.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3