Infodemic - The New Phenomenon

How Social Media During COVID-19 Challenges the Democratic Discourse

Recently, the term "fake news" has been appearing more frequently in various contexts and channels. Especially during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, it emerges as a new challenge, spreading widely and quickly on social media channels such as Facebook, YouTube, WhatsApp or Instagram.

Have you ever read a headline like the following?

It is very likely that you have been exposed to such content. A recent study by Islam et al. (2020) shows, at least 80 percent of a total number of 2.000 COVID-19-related articles on social media are somehow incorrect. Given that 63 percent of Americans reported getting their news from social media (Barthel et al., 2015), it is likely that at least some of them underestimate the prevalance of unverified information in this context.

Although recipients appear to become more aware, with 21 percent saying they identified false information on social media in 2020 (Vodafone Stiftung, 2020), it is probable that more people were exposed to false content without recognizing it.

The map below illustrates COVID-19 an information disorder as a global phenomenon (Islam et al., 2020). We see that democracies (e.g. USA) are just as affected by "fake news" (dark red) as totalitarian regimes (e.g. China).

Considering the global informational situation during the pandemic, the World Health Organization (WHO) refers to it as international crisis followed by an infodemic (WHO, 2020).

But which Parameters Contribute Decisively to this Infodemic?

Uncertainty triggers distrust

First, crisis situations are characterized by high levels of individual uncertainty (e. g. financial or health-related) which increases people's susceptibility to complexity-reducing explanations such as conspiracy myths (H?vermann & Kohlrausch, 2020). Under these conditions social media provides an ideal breeding ground for actors with specific financial or ideological interests to share their persuasive information with large audiences (Morgan, 2018). To make matters worse we observe an increasing loss of trust in political institutions, science and journalism in modern democracies (ibid.). Thus, the pandemic promotes people's vulnerability to fabricated content.

Digital Accessibility

As shown above, studies suggest an increase in information pollution on social media. The pandemic even increases potential exposure to these materials as people spend more time on social media (Mander, 2020).

Alternative Truth

The increasingly prevalent use of terms such as "alternative facts", "alternative truth" or "post-factual" illustrates a changing way of dealing with information (Lee, 2019; Morgan, 2018). Mainstream media and the public get progressively used to being exposed to incorrect information. This ordinariness can result in a trivialization of the information disorder.

What are so-called "Fake News"? A Functional Definition

To understand the complexity of the information ecosystem, we narrow the concept of “fake news”. The current utilization of simplistic terms like "fake news" hides important distinctions and discredits journalism. It focuses on true vs. false, while misleading information errors come in many shades (Wardle & Derakshan, 2017). The definition of "fake news" is problematic, as it is often used in political debate to label contrary news as unreliable or fake (Ruths, 2019).

Wardle and Derakhshan (2017) introduced a new conceptual framework for examining the information disorder:

The Vicious Circle of False Information Dissemination

As described, the current pandemic increases the overall vulnerability to polluted information. But how exactly does social media contribute to this effect?

The image below illustrates the general mechanism of a possible diffusion through social media (compiled by authors). Social media channels are interconnected through links, shares and redirects. This interconnectedness holds the potential for building and mobilizing strategic network structures. Scholars have proven this inherent mobilizing function, when most of the traffic to "Fake News" sites during the 2016 US election could be traced back to social media (Allcott & Gentzkow, 2017).

According to this argument, the potential to repeatedly get involved with alternative media and false information (e.g. KenFM in Germany) is higher if one was already involved on other more popular channels that are linked to less regulated channels like Telegram.

At the end of the funnel, we find a community that is far away from the agenda that is represented by traditional media and the public and which debates their worldview that is relevant for public opinion-forming. We conclude that the networking of "Fake News"-channels on social media is a self-reinforcing system that draws users deeper into their cosmos and leads to self-affirming communities.

But How Does False Information Harm Democracy?

According to a study by the Vodafone Stiftung (2020), 81 percent of the participants believe that the spread of "Fake News" is a danger to democracy. How false information can harm democracy is discussed below. 

Echo chambers: Polarization and rejection of opposing views

With the rise of social media, scholars observe an increasing political polarization of society through selective news consumption (Lee, 2019). This phenomenon is also referred to as "filter bubbles" or "echo chambers" (Lee, 2019, p. 17). In echo chambers on social media, people are isolated from contradictory perspectives (Allcott & Gentzkow, 2017). Studies suggest that people who are surrounded by a more homogeneous community show more intolerance of political differences (Bishop, 2008). In some cases, fabricated information even promotes fears and prejudices (Lee, 2019). During the first month of the COVID-19 pandemic antisocial behavior and stigmatization against people with Asian appearance was widely reported.

Heuristics: Algorithmic exclusion of opposing views

In addition, studies suggest that the logic inherent in social media platforms reinforces the spread of false information (Lee, 2019; Spohr, 2017). Social media algorithms typically highlight the content that is likely to draw the most attention (Lee, 2019). But this content is not necessarily verified as correct (De La Garza, 2020). On social media the rule is: Popularity over accuracy. This simple rule might be partially responsible for the dissemination of false information (ibid.).

Additionally, social cues such as likes or comments can promote the so-called bandwagon effect or heuristic (Sundar, 2008). According to this effect, people tend to systematically overestimate the prevalence of certain opinions in the population based on social cues (ibid.). Thus, algorithms shape judgments about public opinion.

Social media challenges and changes journalistic principles

Although social media platforms are used as news channels and operate like them (Tandoc et al., 2018), they are not regulated like media companies (Morgan, 2018). On social media basically everyone can consume and produce information without fact-checking or other verification processes (Spohr, 2017). This development presents both opportunities and risks. On the one hand, social media democratizes the production and dissemination of information, as any user can access a variety of relevant tools to share a message and mobilize large audiences (Wardle, 2019). On the other hand, this mobilization potential can lead people to misuse social media to manipulate the public with their false information (Morgan, 2018). This becomes even more problematic when we consider that studies suggest recipients have difficulties distinguishing between traditional journalism and citizen journalism on social media (Wardle, 2019). 

COVID-19-related Threats to Democracy – “Querdenken”

Currently, political polarization and echo chambers are manifesting themselves in connection with social movements such as "Querdenken". The German movement that quickly emerged through social media protests against the COVID-19 restrictions. "Querdenken" is a centrally organized movement with its own social media channels and website. 

Their tendency towards conspiracy myths and false information should not be underestimated. Even the domestic intelligence service monitors the movement because of anti-democratic statements and incitements (Deutsche Welle, 2020). This step demonstrates the potential danger posed by such movements.

As discussed, social media is a curse and a blessing at the same time. The question that inevitably arises is how to defuse the infodemic so that it does not further endanger society and politics in the years ahead.

Summing-Up – A Holistic Approach with a Promising Perspective

Based on the aspects discussed in this blog article, we now understand how social media contributes to the spread of "Fake News" in the context of COVID-19. We pointed out several risks of its dissemination and consumption to democratic discourse, such as polarization through echo chambers or manipulation of public opinion amplified by algorithms, to name a few. As social media has become an indispensable part of our information exchange, we need to address its impact on our culture of discourse. In the following, some possible solutions are presented and discussed.

Information, research, strategies

We can already observe political implications arising from COVID-19-related infodemics on social media (Cinelli et al., 2020). Several governments have announced enquiries, are establishing units to debunk the information disorder and are proposing legislation and regulation (Morgan, 2018). The European Union, for example, is calling for social networks to work more closely with researchers and fact-checkers in the COVID-19 crisis, and is discussing new preemptive laws to regulate tech companies after recent incidents like the storming of the U.S. Capitol (Forschung & Lehre, 2020; Reuters, 2021).

In order to make thoughtful political decisions, scientific insights into dynamic information flows in social media (e.g., how false news and true news spread) provide useful methods for extracting patterns for (early) detection of false content. This can be used to derive political frameworks. We can already observe political implications arising from COVID-19-related infodemics on social media (Cinelli et al., 2020).

Platforms

In addition to efforts on the part of politicians, operators of social media platforms are also making increasing efforts to establish ways of recognizing and avoiding false information. Their solutions range from promoting verified information, removing or marking false information, to enable recipients to report false content to trying to avoid posting misleading information in the first place. While Facebook, for example, provides warnings on the timeline and promotes the possibility of reporting "fake news" (see example below), Twitter marks presumably false news and WhatsApp restricts the forwarding of chat messages since 2020.

Nevertheless, restrictions imposed by platform operators must be critically questioned. On the one hand, there are accusations of censorship and the restriction of freedom of opinion, and on the other hand, the accusation that operators are primarily driven by economic interests (Wardle, 2019). Moreover, recent studies show only moderate effectiveness of restriction attempts by platform operators (Clayton et al, 2020; Walter et al., 2020).

 Individual control of information intake

Although politicians and platform operators have a critical role to play in regulating the information disorder, each one of us should also exhaust their own options to identify, correct, and prevent it. One strategy for coping with new information is the SIFT technique recommended by Consumer Reports, which combines fact-checking with source-checking (Caulfield, 2021).

In our framework however, a more holistic approach is necessary, which breaks with dynamics from the beginning, before radical opinions and world views can be internalized.

Media literacy to use technology to our favor

The leverage, apart from the approaches we have presented, lies primarily within the users themselves as responsible citizens: Media-, as well as information literacy must become a natural part of social skills. Social media users must become more aware of their responsibility. Recipients should be able to understand how information is distributed and what interest producers pursue in the process. It is important that children and young people already learn and understand which players are making money in the background and whose interests they represent when they click, read, like, join or subscribe. Factual knowledge about the mechanics and possible risks are an important basis for strategies against mis-, dis- and malinformation. Institutionalized promotion of media- and information literacy (e.g., as a school subject) based on findings in recent scientific scholars is more than necessary in our time.

Ultimately, from a democratic point of view, only elaborate media consumers are also elaborate citizens:

In the Internet age, we have all become media empowered – but we are still far from being media literate: A major and up to now underestimated educational task of our time.

(translated by this article's authors, P?rsken, 2020, as cited in Arning, 2020)

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Allcott, H. and Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31, 5, 211-236.

Arning, 2020. Alternative Medien - erkl?rt von Bernhard P?rksen. SWR. Retrieved from: https://www.swr.de/swr2/leben-und-gesellschaft/alternative-medien-erklaert-von-bernhard-poerksen-100.html

Barthel, M., Shearer, E., Gottfried, J., & Mitchell, A. (2015). The evolving role of news on Twitter and Facebook. Pew Research Center, 14, 1-18.

Bishop, B. (2008), The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-minded America is Tearing us Apart, Mariner Books, New York, NY

Caulfield, M. (2020). Sifting Through the Coronavirus Pandemic [Weblog post]. Retrieved from https://infodemic.blog/

Cinelli, M., Quattrociocchi, W., Galeazzi, A., Valensise, C. M., Brugnoli, E., Schmidt, A. L., Zola, P., Zollo, F. & Scala, A. (2020). The covid-19 social media infodemic. Scientific Reports, 10 (1), 1-10.

Clayton, C., Blair, S., Busam, A .J., Forstner, S., Glance, J., Green, G., Kawata, A., Kovvuri, A., Martin, J., Morgan, E., Sanhu, M., Sang, R., Scholz-Bright, R., Welch, A. T., Wolff, A. G., Zhou, A. & Nyhan, B. (2020). Real Solutions for Fake News? Measuring the Effectiveness of General Warnings and Fact‐Check Tags in Reducing Belief in False Stories on Social Media. Political Behavior, 42, 1073-1095.

De La Garza, A. (2020). How social media is shaping our fears of and response to the coronavirus. Time. Retrieved from: https://time.com/5802802/social-media-coronavirus/

Deutsche Welle, 2020. Germany notes 'violent potential' among anti-lockdown protesters. Retrieved from: https://www.dw.com/en/germany-notes-violent-potential-among-anti-lockdown-protesters/a-55891587

Forschung & Lehre, 2020. EU fordert Zusammenarbeit von sozialen Netzwerken mit Forschern. Retrieved from: https://www.forschung-und-lehre.de/politik/eu-fordert-zusammenarbeit-von-sozialen-netzwerken-mit-forschern-2850/

H?vermann, A., & Kohlrausch, B. (2020). Soziale Ungleichheit und Einkommenseinbu?en in der Corona-Krise–Befunde einer Erwerbst?tigenbefragung. WSI-Mitteilungen, 73(6), 485-492.

Islam, M. S., Sarkar, T., Khan, S. H., Kamal, A. H. M., Hasan, S. M., Kabir, A., Yeasmin, D., Islam, M. A., Chowdhury, K. I. A., Anwar, K. S., Chughtai, A. A. & Seale, H. (2020). COVID-19–related infodemic and its impact on public health: A global social media analysis. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 103(4), 1621-1629.

Lee, T. (2019). The global rise of “fake news” and the threat to democratic elections in the USA. Public Administration and Policy: An Asia-Pacific Journal, 22(1), 15-24.

Mander, J. (2020). Coronavirus: How Consumers Are Actually Reacting [Weblog post]. Global WebIndex. Retrieved from: https://blog.globalwebindex.com/trends/coronavirus-and-consumers/

Morgan, S. (2018). Fake news, disinformation, manipulation and online tactics to undermine democracy. Journal of Cyber Policy, 3(1), 49-43.

Ruths, D. (2019). The misinformation machine. Science 363(6425), 348–348.

Reuters (2021). EU-Kommissar - Sturm auf Kapitol führt zu strengeren Regeln für soziale Medien. Retrieved from: https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-eu-kapitol-soziale-netzwerke-idDEKBN29G1B1

Spohr, D. (2017). Fake news and ideological polarization: filter bubbles and selective exposure on social media. Business Information Review, 34(3), 150-160.

Sundar, S. S. (2008). The MAIN model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In Metzger, M. J., & Flanagin, A. J. (Eds.), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 73–100). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Tandoc, E., C., Lim, Z. W. & Ling, R. (2018). Defining “Fake News”. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 137-153. 

Vodafone Stiftung (2020). Die Jugend in der Infodemie. Retrieved from: https://www.vodafone-stiftung.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/VSD-99-007-FAKE-NEWS-07-WEB.pdf 

Walter, N., Brooks, J.J., Saucier, C.J., & Suresh, S. (2020). Evaluating the impact of attempts to correct health misinformation on social media: A meta-analysis. Health Communication,1-9.

Wardle, C., & Derakhshan, H. (2017). Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making. Council of Europe report, 27, 1-107.

Wardle, C. (2019). Misinformation has created a new world disorder. Scientific American, 321, 88-93.

World Health Organization. (2020). Novel coronavirus (2019-nCov): situation report, 82. Retrieved from: https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200202-sitrep-13-ncov-v3.pdf

IMAGES:

https://www.fticonsulting.com/insights/fti-journal/covid-19-when-fake-news-causes-real-suffering

https://foreignpolicynews.org/2020/07/25/covid-19-does-not-exist-the-global-elites-campaign-of-terror-against-humanity/

Islam et al. (2020, p. 1623)

https://querdenken-711.de

https://www.businessinsider.com/plans-to-storm-the-capitol-circulated-on-social-media-2021-1?r=DE&IR=T

https://tcrn.ch/2gPurIY

https://www.scmp.com/tech/apps-social/article/3065103/how-coronavirus-testing-social-medias-efforts-stem-flow-fake-news