Fake news

Definition and delimitation

The term “fake news” is used in the public debate for different phenomena. For the purpose of systematisation, Egelhofer and Lecheler suggest ^[1] propose a distinction between fake news as a genre and fake news as a label. Fake news as a genre refers to “pseudo-journalistic false information”, while fake news as a label refers to “pseudo-journalistic false information” ^[2] while fake news as a label means the attack on and criticism of journalistic quality media (e.g. the accusation of the “lying press”).

Since the term is therefore not used unambiguously, Zimmermann and Kohring designate ^[3] name the genre of fake news much more appropriately as “disinformation”. This suggestion will also be followed here.

Accordingly, disinformation can be understood as news reports that are intentionally and demonstrably false and are intended to mislead the recipient ^[4]. These are contributions that are based on incorrect facts and/or fictitious reports, but are intended to appear as serious news reports. An important characteristic of disinformation is therefore its intentionality; the misleading is done knowingly, consciously and intentionally ^[5]. This is to be distinguished from unintentional errors, which of course can always be found in journalistic products, but which are not based on a conscious intention to deceive. Another central criterion of disinformation is that the content is empirically false, i.e. it is a form of false reporting. Disinformation also includes audio, visual or audiovisual content.

The dissemination of disinformation can happen online or through other media channels, but this is not mandatory. False news can also be passed on in the context of interpersonal communication.

History

Originally, the term fake news was understood to mean news satire or news parody ^[6]. The spread of disinformation is a very old phenomenon – rumours and also false information have always been published in classical mass media or in the tabloid press.

With the advent of digital communication possibilities, however, the phenomenon has gained new momentum. Social media in particular offer a good and quick way to spread disinformation to a comparatively wide audience.

Especially in the context of the 2016 US presidential election campaign, there was a lot of discussion about disinformation campaigns and their impact, as it was mainly false news in favour of presidential candidate Donald Trump that circulated on Facebook.

Prevalence and risks of disinformation

Disinformation is particularly relevant in the context of political communication, especially in opinion-forming contexts such as election campaigns. The aim here is often to use false news to influence the public debate and/or motivate certain political camps to vote ^[7].
Studies show, however, that the prevalence of disinformation is often estimated (and thus overestimated) to be significantly higher than the actual contact of recipients with false information ^{[8, 9]}.

Disinformation campaigns are dangerous, among other things, because they undermine the objective opinion- and will-forming process by basing it on false information ^[10]. The danger of falling for misinformation is particularly pronounced for the group of people who get their information only online, for example via social media, and have little contact with other news sources and/or little contact with people with more diverse media use.

Since misinformation is often presented like journalistic articles, it is often not recognisable at first glance. Tandoc et al. ^[11] note that recipients often rely on their own judgement, and if they are uncertain, they turn to external resources for authentication. In addition, the social environment is crucial for the correction of false news.

Research projects at bidt

Within the framework of the project “Challenges of regulating digital communication platforms” at bidt, research is being conducted on ensuring the quality of public communication. In particular, the prevention of disinformation on the net is a challenge that is dealt with in greater depth within the framework of empirical studies. Specifically, the central question is to what extent platforms can be regulated in such a way that diversity of opinion is guaranteed and disinformation is prevented, while at the same time ensuring data protection, copyright and competition law.

The challenge of disinformation is also being addressed in the project “Digitalisation as a driver of the pandemic? Media crisis communication under the conditions of digital publics during the Corona crisis 2020/2021”. With this project, the formation of public opinion in times of crisis will be examined in greater depth and the analysis of the emergence and spread of disinformation will play an important role.

The project “Measuring Opinion Power and Diversity on the Internet: Pilot Project on Journalistic Concentration Control” develops proposals on how the opinion power of intermediaries on the internet can be determined and taken into account in the context of regulation.

---