For those of you who have access to Australian television, this is an advance warning that the research on coronavirus-related mis- and disinformation that my colleagues and I at the QUT Digital Media Research Centre have conducted during the first half of this year will be featured prominently in tonight’s episode of the ABC’s investigative journalism programme Four Corners, which focusses on 5G conspiracy theories. A preview is below, and I hope that the full programme may also become available without geoblocking on ABC iView or the Four Corners Facebook page. The accompanying ABC News article has further information, too.
Related to this work, and the ARC Discovery research project that supports it, we are now also calling for expressions of interest in a three-year PhD scholarship on mis- and disinformation in social media, which will commence in early 2021. Please get in touch with me if you’re interested in the scholarship:
PhD Scholarship: ARC Discovery project on Mis- and Disinformation in Social Media (PhD commencing 2021)
The QUT Digital Media Research Centre is offering a three-year PhD scholarship associated with a major ARC Discovery research project on mis- and disinformation in social media. Working with DMRC research leaders Axel Bruns, Stephen Harrington, and Dan Angus, and collaborating with Scott Wright (Monash University, Melbourne), Jenny Stromer-Galley (Syracuse University, USA), and Karin Wahl-Jorgensen (Cardiff University, UK), the PhD researcher will use qualitative and quantitative analytics methods to investigate the dissemination patterns and processes for mis- and disinformation.
The COVID-19 online edition of the wonderful Social Media & Society conference has just started, and my colleague Tobias Keller and I are presenting our latest research via a YouTube video that has now been released. In our study we examine the average dissemination curves for news articles from mainstream and fringe news sources; this analysis is prompted by the persistent media framing of past research as (supposedly) showing that ‘fake news’ disseminates more quickly than ‘real news’.
Leaving aside such disputed labels, we find no evidence of any systematic differences in dissemination speeds on Twitter: during 2019, for example, stories from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s ABC News site (Australia’s most trusted news source) disseminated almost exactly as quickly as those from the hyperpartisan outlet Breitbart: on average, both reached 25% of their eventual dissemination within just under four hours, and 50% after ten hours.
There are, though, notable differences between different site types: content from specialist sites like The Conversation (which publishes scholarly findings and commentary for a general audience) or Judicial Watch (engaging in hyperpartisan legal commentary and lawfare) usually disseminates considerably more slowly than material from more generalist news sites, from the mainstream or the fringes.
Here are the video and slides from our presentation – and a work-in-progress paper (though focussing on only one month of data, rather than all of 2019) is also online.
I’ve been working from home since mid-March now, but the research continues even if remotely. Here are some more updates on the latest outputs.
First, in addition to our ‘Australia at Home’ online seminar, my QUT colleague Tim Graham and I (with support from our research assistant Guangnan Zhu and Rod Campbell from the Australia Institute) have now also published a report for the Australia Institute’s Centre for Responsible Technology that investigates the presence of coordinated activity on Twitter in the early days of the COVID-19 outbreak. We find evidence of coordinated networks of accounts promoting the false claim that the coronavirus was engineered as a bioweapon, as well as pushing a range of other conspiracy theories. The full report is out now – and here’s the press release from the Centre for Responsible Technology.
Further, I also spoke about this and related research as part of an online panel discussion organised by the University of Queensland Art Museum. In a wide-ranging discussion, we touched on the spread of COVID-related ‘fake news’, the question of how platforms, regulators, and the general public should respond to such mis- and disinformation, and the need for much more (and much more interdisciplinary) research in this area. Here’s the full video:
Like most of us, the current COVID-19 crisis has forced me to work from home for the foreseeable future, but my colleagues and I at the QUT Digital Media Research Centre have remained just as busy – in fact, of course, as a significant driver of journalistic coverage, of newssharing through social media (including both legitimate news and various forms of mis- and disinformation), and of general social media debate and discussion, the crisis intersects directly with some of our core research areas.
Many of us in this field now have urgent research projects in train that address some of these phenomena, and there are also many important conversations about how we can engage in rapid research and publication projects without sacrificing the necessary scholarly rigour. At the same time a number of key public outreach activities have also been organised to ensure that we have the platforms to share our findings with the general public.
My own focus in this has been to investigate the patterns of what the World Health Organisation has described as an ‘infodemic’: the viral transmission of mis- and disinformation associated with the coronavirus pandemic that has the potential to do real harm to the general population. This also aligns with a new research project on Evaluating the Challenge of ‘Fake News’ and Other Malinformation (funded by the Australian Research Council and also involving Stephen Harrington, Dan Angus, Scott Wright, Jenny Stromer-Galley, and Karin Wahl-Jorgensen) which is about to commence.
Together with my colleague Tim Graham I have presented some early observations from this work, focussing especially on the dynamics of some common COVID-19 conspiracy theories, in the Australia Institute’s ‘Australia at Home’ online seminar series. The video from our presentation is below, and I have also posted the full slides and background to the seminar.
Further, I was also very pleased to participate in a public discussion organised by Jack Qiu for the Chinese Communication Association, as part of their Solidarity Symposium series. Together with some of the leading Chinese digital and social media communication researchers, we had an intensive and wide-ranging discussion about the opportunities and challenges of doing this research, from home or elsewhere, and shared some of our own emerging insights into communication patterns during the current crisis. The seminar video is below, and I’ve posted more details elsewhere.
The next speaker in this AoIR 2019 session is Eddy Hurcombe, whose focus is on the pursuit of social media interactions metrics by Australian news organisations that post deliberately controversial content – in essence, trolling for engagement. This taps into the social media logics that build on the platforms’ governing principles – and these social media logics now also increasingly govern the engagement with and dissemination of news stories.
The next speaker in this AoIR 2019 session is Fabio Giglietto, whose focus is on inauthentic coordinated link sharing on Facebook in the run-up to the 2018 Italian and 2019 European election in Italy. ‘Coordinated inauthentic behaviour’ is a term used by Facebook itself, especially to justify its periodic mass account take-downs; the term remains poorly defined, however, and Facebook’s own press releases mainly point to a one-minute video that it has published to define the term.
For the final (wow) session of AoIR 2019 I’m in a session on news automation, which starts with Marijn Martens. He begins by describing algorithms (for instance, news recommender algorithms) as a form of culture, as well as as a form of technical construct – and by highlighting as well how algorithms are being imagined, perceived, and experienced through the mental models that users construct for them.
The final speaker in this AoIR 2019 panel is Anders Olof Larsson, whose focus is on the developments of online political communication in Sweden – this covers the 2010, 2014, and 2018 national elections. His focus is especially on the rise of populism in Swedish politics, and the platformisation of messaging in election campaigns.
The next speaker in this AoIR 2019 session is Jakob Linaa Jensen, who focusses on the Danish political environment. He and his colleagues conducted surveys amongst Internet users in four Danish election campaigns (2007, 2011, 2015, and 2019) to examine their experiences with the role of social media in national elections. Denmark has a multi-party system, and Facebook is clearly the leading social media platform here.
The next speaker in this AoIR 2019 session is the fabulous Jenny Stromer-Galley, who shifts our focus to 2014 and 2018 gubernatorial campaigns in the United States. She begins by noting the significant growth in negative advertising in U.S. elections, and this increase may also have led to a gradual decline in voter turnout as well as a general mistrust of political and democratic institutions.
![[Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 License]](http://creativecommons.org/images/public/somerights20.gif "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 License")
