Elections and fact-checking in Portugal: the case of the 2019 and 2022 legislative elections

Author:

Baptista João-Pedro1ORCID,Jerónimo Pedro2ORCID,Piñeiro-Naval Valeriano3ORCID,Gradim Anabela2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro

2. Universidade de Beira Interior

3. Universidad de Salamanca

Abstract

Fact-checking is a relatively recent journalistic genre in Portugal that has been growing in recent years, alternately viewed as a journalism reform movement or criticized as inefficient and idealistic. Our study is a comparative analysis of the output of the Portuguese fact-checkers Observador and Polígrafo in the 2019–2022 elections to determine whether their coverage is politically biased. Performing a quantitative content analysis of all fact-checking articles on national politics (n = 265) published during the campaign for the parliamentary elections, our results show that fact-checking activity has increased in the last elections. These data may indicate that fact-checking agencies have increased their capacity and resources, but may also suggest a greater presence of subjectivity and deception in Portuguese political discourse. The focus of Portuguese fact-checkers is statements produced during political debates (70%), while social media verification is disregarded. Our most significant finding is the lack of evidence of partisan or political bias in the selection of the assessed statements. Both fact-checkers do not show a tendency to check statements that are more or less anti- or pro-government and/or statements that are ideologically favorable to the left wing or the right wing. Therefore, our findings confirm the high level of professionalism and impartiality of Portuguese fact-checkers evidenced in other studies, and demonstrate that the Portuguese citizen’s skepticism toward the practice has no foundation.

Publisher

Ediciones Profesionales de la Informacion SL

Subject

Library and Information Sciences,Information Systems,General Medicine

Cited by 3 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