How is Portugal addressing disinformation? Results of a mapping of initiatives (2010-2023)

A. F. Oliveira, Margarida Maneta, M. Brites, Vanessa Ribeiro-Rodrigues
{"title":"How is Portugal addressing disinformation? Results of a mapping of initiatives (2010-2023)","authors":"A. F. Oliveira, Margarida Maneta, M. Brites, Vanessa Ribeiro-Rodrigues","doi":"10.15847/obsobs18520242444","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The brisky transformation of the internet and the rise of digital technologies have been causing a deep impact on the media and in the ways audiences access, consume and participate. Although in this era information is closer and more available to citizens, concerns have been raised regarding 1) the quality of the information disseminated by digital platforms, 2) the impacts it may have on democracies and 3) the urgency of promoting citizens' MIL competencies. Disseminating unverified content can pose threats towards the status of the Internet as a space for free and informative debate, and as a tool for social inclusion. Portugal is pointed out as the second European country where citizens are most concerned about authenticity and validity of information (Newman et al., 2020). However data also shows that mechanisms of disinformation are quite participated by them. In this way, it becomes relevant to understand how the various sectors of society have been promoting the empowerment of citizens, and their resilience and competence toward information disorder. \nWithin the scope of the project Read Twice, the team carried out a mapping of initiatives focused on tackling disinformation. The aim was to identify good practices and outline Portugal’s experience concerning this issue. After an initial listing of activities (N=20) promoted over the last 13 years, the team identified 3 Top Initiatives and eleven Best Practices. Overall results suggest that media literacy has been in the spotlight in the Portuguese context since the 1980s. There is also a tendency for media literacy initiatives to engage target audiences through active, participatory and creative approaches. However, and although the longest-running activity dates from the late 1980s, the initiatives identified are limited to a specific timeframe, suggesting that there is a lack of continuity repeatedly emphasised in the research.","PeriodicalId":149155,"journal":{"name":"Observatorio (OBS*)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Observatorio (OBS*)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15847/obsobs18520242444","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The brisky transformation of the internet and the rise of digital technologies have been causing a deep impact on the media and in the ways audiences access, consume and participate. Although in this era information is closer and more available to citizens, concerns have been raised regarding 1) the quality of the information disseminated by digital platforms, 2) the impacts it may have on democracies and 3) the urgency of promoting citizens' MIL competencies. Disseminating unverified content can pose threats towards the status of the Internet as a space for free and informative debate, and as a tool for social inclusion. Portugal is pointed out as the second European country where citizens are most concerned about authenticity and validity of information (Newman et al., 2020). However data also shows that mechanisms of disinformation are quite participated by them. In this way, it becomes relevant to understand how the various sectors of society have been promoting the empowerment of citizens, and their resilience and competence toward information disorder. Within the scope of the project Read Twice, the team carried out a mapping of initiatives focused on tackling disinformation. The aim was to identify good practices and outline Portugal’s experience concerning this issue. After an initial listing of activities (N=20) promoted over the last 13 years, the team identified 3 Top Initiatives and eleven Best Practices. Overall results suggest that media literacy has been in the spotlight in the Portuguese context since the 1980s. There is also a tendency for media literacy initiatives to engage target audiences through active, participatory and creative approaches. However, and although the longest-running activity dates from the late 1980s, the initiatives identified are limited to a specific timeframe, suggesting that there is a lack of continuity repeatedly emphasised in the research.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
葡萄牙如何处理虚假信息?举措规划结果(2010-2023 年)
互联网的迅猛发展和数字技术的兴起对媒体以及受众获取、消费和参与的方式产生了深远的影响。尽管在这个时代,信息离公民更近、更容易获得,但人们对以下问题表示担忧:1)数字平台传播信息的质量;2)可能对民主产生的影响;3)提高公民的 MIL 能力的紧迫性。传播未经核实的内容会威胁到互联网作为自由和信息辩论空间以及社会包容工具的地位。葡萄牙是欧洲第二个公民最关注信息真实性和有效性的国家(Newman et al.)然而,数据也显示,虚假信息的机制也相当受到他们的关注。因此,了解社会各界是如何促进公民赋权、提高他们应对信息失序的能力和复原力就变得尤为重要。在 "读两遍 "项目的范围内,该团队开展了一项以应对虚假信息为重点的行动摸底调查。其目的是确定良好做法并概述葡萄牙在这一问题上的经验。在初步列出过去 13 年中推广的活动(N=20)后,团队确定了 3 项顶级倡议和 11 项最佳做法。总体结果表明,自 20 世纪 80 年代以来,媒体扫盲一直是葡萄牙关注的焦点。媒体扫盲活动也倾向于通过积极的、参与性的和创造性的方法来吸引目标受众。然而,尽管持续时间最长的活动可以追溯到 20 世纪 80 年代末,但所确定的活动仅限于特定的时间范围,这表明研究中反复强调的缺乏连续性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
How is Portugal addressing disinformation? Results of a mapping of initiatives (2010-2023) Decoding algorithmic literacy among journalists Perceptions of University Students in Communication about Disinformation: Special Issue (2024) Media Literacy to Tackle Disinformation A taxonomy for Media Literacy in Portugal
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1