The Reception of Fake News: The Interpretations and Practices That Shape the Consumption of Perceived Misinformation

Abstract

How do people make sense of, and deal with, a changing media landscape perceived to be filled with misinformation and fake news? To answer this, we draw upon data from seventy-one indepth interviews in Chicago, Philadelphia, and Miami. We found that perceptions about the overall media ecosystem were characterized by a: a) negative view of the current quality of news reporting, b) particular distrust of news circulation on social media; and c) concern about the effects of these trends mainly on the information habits of others. To counter these perceptions, participants indicated to rely on: a) traditional fact-based media, accompanied by a rejection of opinionated outlets; b) personal experience and knowledge; c) repetition of information across outlets; d) consumption of cross-ideological sources; e) fact-checking; and f) trust in certain personal contacts on social media, who are perceived as assessors of news quality. Our findings suggest that: a) news consumption is being ritualized in new and more personalized ways; b) social media is seen as a gateway to news partly because audiences find opinion leaders in terms of their skills as credibility assessors; and c) journalism could cater more to audiences' demands for more fact-oriented and less discussionbased content.

The Use of Social Networking Sites and Pro-Environmental Behaviors: A Mediation and Moderation Model

“…SNSs provide individuals with convenient outlets for acquiring awareness of environmental issues. However, due to their fast-forwarding functionality, SNSs facilitate the dissemination of misinformation, which eventually contributes to negative effects on users [ 138 , 139 , 140 ]. Therefore, in future, scholars need to consider the impacts of perceived inaccurate/disinformation on people’s fear of victimization and pro-environmental behaviors.…”

Digital Disinformation About COVID-19 and the Third-Person Effect: Examining the Channel Differences and Negative Emotional Outcomes

“…11,12 In addition to the differentiation of varied digital media that audiences might be exposed to fake news, it is important to realize that audiences become more alert in their reception practices given the deterioration in news quality and credibility. 13,14 People with accuracy goals tend to practice more active information-checking behaviors and are less likely to be influenced by the disinformation. 15 Based on these findings, two hypotheses are proposed:…”

Digital Disinformation and the Imaginative Dimension of Communication

“…This has significant implications as regards how people might deal with information disorder online. This is borne out by works in journalism studies that explore how the social embeddedness of people influences how they might respond to fake news (e.g., Duffy et al, 2019; Tandoc et al, 2018; Wagner & Boczkowski, 2019). One particular study on how people engage with digital disinformation points out that social relationships are a key consideration in whether people decide to act on or ignore the fake news content they see on their newsfeeds.…”