TikTok 上的验证机构:MediaWise 和 Politifact 案例

IF 1.7 Q2 SOCIOLOGY Societies Pub Date : 2024-04-28 DOI:10.3390/soc14050059
Antonio Díaz-Lucena, Pablo Hidalgo-Cobo
{"title":"TikTok 上的验证机构:MediaWise 和 Politifact 案例","authors":"Antonio Díaz-Lucena, Pablo Hidalgo-Cobo","doi":"10.3390/soc14050059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research aims to analyse the work of two international information verification agencies on TikTok ─MediaWise and Politifact—according to their evolution, approach, content, and format. To this end, a quantitative approach has been used with an inductive content analysis with nominal variables, which offers specific nuances adapted to the unit of analysis. In a first phase, an empirical analysis was carried out, focusing on the measurement and quantification of the number of publications and interactions of the audience, from the time Fthey started operating on this platform until 31 December 2023. The total number of posts extracted was N > 704, which generated N > 4,166,387 user responses. In a second phase, an in-depth content analysis of all the posts published by these two agencies in four months (October and November 2021 and October and November 2023) was carried out, allowing us to analyse their evolution, but also to compare the two agencies in terms of approach, themes, and style. The most important findings show that both agencies adapt the style and narratives to this social network through the use of dynamic resources, a casual and informal tone, and elements of humour. In addition, both contribute to public reason through different strategies: MediaWise focuses on media literacy and Politifact on verification, using resources, effects and content in line with that purpose. Finally, we observe a downward evolution in terms of reach and impact on the audience, as well as a lower dynamism in 2023 than in 2021, which opens the door to future lines of explanatory research that delve deeper into possible causes.","PeriodicalId":21795,"journal":{"name":"Societies","volume":"127 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Verification Agencies on TikTok: The Case of MediaWise and Politifact\",\"authors\":\"Antonio Díaz-Lucena, Pablo Hidalgo-Cobo\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/soc14050059\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This research aims to analyse the work of two international information verification agencies on TikTok ─MediaWise and Politifact—according to their evolution, approach, content, and format. To this end, a quantitative approach has been used with an inductive content analysis with nominal variables, which offers specific nuances adapted to the unit of analysis. In a first phase, an empirical analysis was carried out, focusing on the measurement and quantification of the number of publications and interactions of the audience, from the time Fthey started operating on this platform until 31 December 2023. The total number of posts extracted was N > 704, which generated N > 4,166,387 user responses. In a second phase, an in-depth content analysis of all the posts published by these two agencies in four months (October and November 2021 and October and November 2023) was carried out, allowing us to analyse their evolution, but also to compare the two agencies in terms of approach, themes, and style. The most important findings show that both agencies adapt the style and narratives to this social network through the use of dynamic resources, a casual and informal tone, and elements of humour. In addition, both contribute to public reason through different strategies: MediaWise focuses on media literacy and Politifact on verification, using resources, effects and content in line with that purpose. Finally, we observe a downward evolution in terms of reach and impact on the audience, as well as a lower dynamism in 2023 than in 2021, which opens the door to future lines of explanatory research that delve deeper into possible causes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21795,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Societies\",\"volume\":\"127 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Societies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/soc14050059\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Societies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/soc14050059","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在根据两家国际信息验证机构--MediaWise 和 Politifact--的演变、方法、内容和形式,对其在 TikTok 上的工作进行分析。为此,我们采用了一种定量分析方法,利用名义变量进行归纳式内容分析,从而根据分析单位提供具体的细微差别。在第一阶段,我们进行了实证分析,重点是测量和量化从 "Fthey "开始在该平台上运行至 2023 年 12 月 31 日期间的出版物数量和受众的互动情况。提取的帖子总数 N > 704 个,产生的用户回复 N > 4,166,387 个。在第二阶段,我们对这两家机构在四个月(2021 年 10 月和 11 月以及 2023 年 10 月和 11 月)内发布的所有帖子进行了深入的内容分析,不仅分析了帖子的演变,还从方法、主题和风格方面对两家机构进行了比较。最重要的研究结果表明,两家机构都通过使用动态资源、随意和非正式的语气以及幽默元素,使其风格和叙事方式与这一社交网络相适应。此外,两家机构还通过不同的策略促进公众理性:MediaWise 专注于媒体扫盲,而 Politifact 则专注于核实,并根据这一目的使用资源、效果和内容。最后,我们观察到,2023 年的受众覆盖率和影响力呈下降趋势,活力也低于 2021 年,这为今后深入探讨可能原因的解释性研究打开了大门。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Verification Agencies on TikTok: The Case of MediaWise and Politifact
This research aims to analyse the work of two international information verification agencies on TikTok ─MediaWise and Politifact—according to their evolution, approach, content, and format. To this end, a quantitative approach has been used with an inductive content analysis with nominal variables, which offers specific nuances adapted to the unit of analysis. In a first phase, an empirical analysis was carried out, focusing on the measurement and quantification of the number of publications and interactions of the audience, from the time Fthey started operating on this platform until 31 December 2023. The total number of posts extracted was N > 704, which generated N > 4,166,387 user responses. In a second phase, an in-depth content analysis of all the posts published by these two agencies in four months (October and November 2021 and October and November 2023) was carried out, allowing us to analyse their evolution, but also to compare the two agencies in terms of approach, themes, and style. The most important findings show that both agencies adapt the style and narratives to this social network through the use of dynamic resources, a casual and informal tone, and elements of humour. In addition, both contribute to public reason through different strategies: MediaWise focuses on media literacy and Politifact on verification, using resources, effects and content in line with that purpose. Finally, we observe a downward evolution in terms of reach and impact on the audience, as well as a lower dynamism in 2023 than in 2021, which opens the door to future lines of explanatory research that delve deeper into possible causes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Societies
Societies SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
9.50%
发文量
150
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Antimicrobial Resistance: The Impact from and on Society According to One Health Approach Translating Values into Quality: How We Can Use Max Weber’s Ethic of Responsibility to Rethink Professional Ethics Everyday Life Infrastructure Impact on Subjective Well-Being in the European Union: A Gender Perspective Cross-Disciplinary Rapid Scoping Review of Structural Racial and Caste Discrimination Associated with Population Health Disparities in the 21st Century Syndemic Connections: Overdose Death Crisis, Gender-Based Violence and COVID-19
×
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