Intentional or inadvertent fake news sharing? Fact-checking warnings and users’ interaction with social media content

Abstract

The main social media platforms have been implementing strategies to minimize fake news dissemination. These include identifying, labeling, and penalizing –via news feed ranking algorithms– fake publications. Part of the rationale behind this approach is that the negative effects of fake content arise only when social media users are deceived. Once debunked, fake posts and news stories should therefore become harmless. Unfortunately, the literature shows that the effects of misinformation are more complex and tend to persist and even backfire after correction. Furthermore, we still do not know much about how social media users evaluate content that has been fact-checked and flagged as false. More worryingly, previous findings suggest that some people may intentionally share made up news on social media, although their motivations are not fully explained. To better understand users’ interaction with social media content identified or recognized as false, we analyze qualitative and quantitative data from five focus groups and a sub-national online survey (N = 350). Findings suggest that the label of ‘false news’ plays a role –although not necessarily central– in social media users’ evaluation of the content and their decision (not) to share it. Some participants showed distrust in fact-checkers and lack of knowledge about the fact-checking process. We also found that fake news sharing is a two-dimensional phenomenon that includes intentional and unintentional behaviors. We discuss some of the reasons why some of social media users may choose to distribute fake news content intentionally.

Spanish Fact-Checking Services: An Approach to Their Business Models

“…It has been denounced that the corrections of information published and the notes by the fact-checking services may be ineffective, and even many of their results may be considered non-neutral [23]. Some of the most popular fact-checking services in the United States and Spain have been accused of "being unfair and biased" [24]. In many cases, these accusations are related to the business links that some platforms maintain with the media, whose influence is manifested in three fundamental aspects: the sharing of the same professionals, the selection of certain content to verify and no other, and the submission to the editorial line of the reference medium or to the ideology of the business group to which the medium belongs.…”

Americans’ Perspectives on Online Media Warning Labels

“…This makes undoing the damage of fake news challenging, as the information consumers see their actions as being fully rational within their operating paradigm. Indeed, attempts to point out fake news may be ignored by those with low conscientiousness levels who may "desire to create chaos" [62], and others may simply not trust the warnings [63].…”

Fake news on the internet: a literature review, synthesis and directions for future research

“…Furthermore, users' intention to share FNI is significantly affected by debunking information. The presence of debunking information (Chua and Banerjee, 2018; Chung and Kim, 2021) and the flagging of news (Ardèvol-Abreu et al. , 2020; Mena, 2020) reduce the intention to share by diminishing the credibility of the news.…”