Challenges in Political Fact-checking and the Role of Journalism
Since the 2016 U.S. presidential election, fact-checking has become a vital element in journalism across the globe. However, there is a concern over potential partisan bias in fact-checking. Its failure to reach the extensive audience is also seen as a challenge that needs to be addressed. In Japan,...
Saved in:
Published in | Socio-Informatics Vol. 8; no. 3; pp. 15 - 28 |
---|---|
Main Author | |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | Japanese |
Published |
The Society of Socio-Informatics
01.07.2020
一般社団法人 社会情報学会 |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 2187-2775 2432-2148 |
DOI | 10.14836/ssi.8.3_15 |
Cover
Summary: | Since the 2016 U.S. presidential election, fact-checking has become a vital element in journalism across the globe. However, there is a concern over potential partisan bias in fact-checking. Its failure to reach the extensive audience is also seen as a challenge that needs to be addressed. In Japan, fact-checking is encouraged by the government as a measure against the so-called fake news. However, there is not enough discussion about how to conduct more effective fact-checking. This study reveals what needs to be improved in fact-checking by qualitatively analyzing social media responses to fact-checks conducted by local newspapers during the 2018 Okinawa gubernatorial election. I found that some of the fact-checking messages induced partisan reactions and were used by members of political parties to attack the opponent. Furthermore, a comparative analysis of Twitter posts sharing fact-checking articles and responses to tweets including fake content revealed a partisan division in the Twitter sphere. Fact-checks that induced partisan responses were not conducted based on international standards, while a distinction between fact-checking and verification was ambiguous. The role of journalism in the domain of fact-checking is to offer factual information for the electorate to help them make appropriate decisions. I argue that there needs to be 1) a clearer distinction between the use of the terms “fact-checking” and “verification,” 2) an increased transparency in the process of fact-checking, and 3) a framework that allows the audience to evaluate the fairness of fact-checking. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2187-2775 2432-2148 |
DOI: | 10.14836/ssi.8.3_15 |