Countries have more than 100 laws on the books to combat misinformation. How well do they work?

Yadav, Kamya; Erdoğdu, Ulaş; Siwakoti, Samikshya; Shapiro, Jacob N.; Wanless, Alicia

doi:10.1080/00963402.2021.1912111

Cited by 17 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To be sure, there is no simple solution to the problem. The COVID-19 pandemic has spurred numerous laws around the globe to combat misinformation, but their effectiveness (and for some, their legitimacy) remains in question [75]. In a democratic society, it appears that a reasonable path forward should involve concerted policy efforts to promote public awareness, media literacy, technological interventions, and legal accountability, among other initiatives.…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

Endorsement of COVID-19 misinformation among criminal legal involved individuals in the United States: Prevalence and relationship with information sources

Zhao,

Hingle,

Shaw

et al. 2024

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Criminal legal system involvement (CLI) is a critical social determinant of health that lies at the intersection of multiple sources of health disparities. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbates many of these disparities, and specific vulnerabilities faced by the CLI population. This study investigated the prevalence of COVID-19-related misinformation, as well as its relationship with COVID-19 information sources used among Americans experiencing CLI. A nationally representative sample of American adults aged 18+ (N = 1,161), including a subsample of CLI individuals (n = 168), were surveyed in February-March 2021. On a 10-item test, CLI participants endorsed a greater number of misinformation statements (M = 1.88 vs. 1.27) than non-CLI participants, p < .001. CLI participants reported less use of government and scientific sources (p = .017) and less use of personal sources (p = .003) for COVID-19 information than non-CLI participants. Poisson models showed that use of government and scientific sources was negatively associated with misinformation endorsement for non-CLI participants (IRR = .841, p < .001), but not for CLI participants (IRR = .957, p = .619). These findings suggest that building and leveraging trust in important information sources are critical to the containment and mitigation of COVID-19-related misinformation in the CLI population.

show abstract

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

Endorsement of COVID-19 misinformation among criminal legal involved individuals in the United States: Prevalence and relationship with information sources

Zhao,

Hingle,

Shaw

et al. 2024

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Chinese government's censorship of internet content is a case in point (King et al, 2014), as is the introduction of "fake news" laws during the pandemic as a way for authoritarian states to justify repressive policies that stifle the opposition and further infringe on freedom of the press (The Economist, 2021;Wiseman, 2020;Yadav et al, 2021; for an overview of misinformation actions worldwide see Funke and Flamini, n.d.).…”

Section: Free Speech Vs Harmful Misinformation: Moral Dilemmas In Onl...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Resolving content moderation dilemmas between free speech and harmful misinformation

Kozyreva¹,

Herzog²,

Lewandowsky³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When moderating content online, two key values may come into conflict: protecting freedom of expression and preventing harm. Robust rules based in part on how citizens think about these moral dilemmas are necessary to deal with the unprecedented scale and urgency of this conflict in a principled way. Yet little is known about people's judgments and preferences around content moderation. We examined such moral dilemmas in a conjoint survey experiment where respondents (N = 2,564) indicated whether they would remove problematic social media posts on election denial, anti-vaccination, Holocaust denial, and climate change denial and whether they would take punitive action against the accounts. Respondents were shown key information about the user and their post, as well as the consequences of the misinformation. The majority preferred quashing harmful misinformation over protecting free speech. Respondents were more likely to remove posts and suspend accounts if the consequences were severe and if it was a repeated offence. Features related to the account itself (the person behind the account, their partisanship, and number of followers) had little to no effect on respondents' decisions. Content moderation of harmful misinformation was a partisan issue: Across all four scenarios, Republicans were consistently less willing than Democrats or Independents to delete posts or penalize the accounts that posted them. Our results can inform the design of transparent rules of content moderation for human and algorithmic moderators.

show abstract

“…In addition to the enhanced accuracy with which AI can detect false information or recognise disinformation tactics deployed through bots and deepfakes (Marcellino et al, 2020[47]), AI solutions are more cost-effective because they reduce the time and human resources required for detecting and removing false content. However, at the same time, the effective use of AI for countering untruths online depends on large volumes of data as well as supervised learning without which such tools run the risk of false positives and human biases (Woolley, 2020 [48]).…”

Section: How Are Untruths Spread Online and What Are The Consequences?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Disentangling untruths online

2022

Going Digital Toolkit Notes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Countries have more than 100 laws on the books to combat misinformation. How well do they work?

Cited by 17 publications

References 0 publications

Endorsement of COVID-19 misinformation among criminal legal involved individuals in the United States: Prevalence and relationship with information sources

Endorsement of COVID-19 misinformation among criminal legal involved individuals in the United States: Prevalence and relationship with information sources

Resolving content moderation dilemmas between free speech and harmful misinformation

Disentangling untruths online

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About