Recent Articles

Experts disagree on how to fight AI disinformation, but agree that health and politics need different solutions
Alexander Loth, Martin Kappes and Marc-Oliver Pahl
When 54 international experts assessed AI-generated disinformation threats, they revealed a surprising pattern: while video deepfakes received the highest average threat ratings in the political domain (M = 6.31/7), the pattern differed in the health domain, where AI-generated text received the highest average rating (M = 5.80).

Fact-Checking
“When politicians make claims, we are journalists”: Political fact-checking and social media partnerships
Nathalia Gonzalez, Juliana da Cunha Mota and Nicole Stremlau
This article examines how fact checkers in the EU perceive and respond to tensions between their journalistic commitment to political fact-checking and platform partnership rules that restrict the rating of politicians’ claims. Drawing on interviews and survey responses, we find that they understand their work through a journalistic role conception, including a commitment to scrutinizing political elites.
Amplifying the storm: Climate disinformation dynamics during natural disasters on right-wing extremist Telegram channels
Diego DiMattina, André Sobral and David Nemer
Climate change amplifies natural disasters, posing an existential threat to our society. However, a digital storm is raging on right-wing extremist Telegram channels where climate disinformation works to delegitimize scientific consensus. Investigating the factors that amplify climate disinformation is as critical to combating it as understanding natural disasters and their drivers. We

Fact-Checking
Narrative monitoring and argument-checking: Enhancing effectiveness in countering disinformation beyond fact-checking
Celia Ramos, Clara Jiménez-Cruz and Pablo Hernández-Escayola
In the October 2024 flash floods in Spain, social media posts falsely claimed authorities were concealing the number of casualties. The narrative centered on a flooded parking structure in Valencia, where hundreds of bodies were falsely claimed to be trapped. This narrative gained traction even after videos showing the premises had been evacuated.

Fact-Checking
Fact checking what matters: How a harms-based model for selecting claims works
Peter Cunliffe-Jones
Not all misinformation consequences are equal. Faced by hundreds of thousands of false claims online and offline every day, fact checkers need a robust way to identify the important ones to check. This scalable model—used by fact checkers in trials in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East since 2024—helps forecast the potential imminent and cumulative harms of different false claims and is an early warning system for society that focuses efforts on factually false claims that cause real-world harms.

Fact-Checking
Beyond compliance: How European fact checkers correct their own errors
Mato Brautović, Ivana Grkeš Tošović and Romana John
Fact checkers should maintain high standards of accountability because they hold unique positions in society by verifying content that can influence political practices and society as a whole. To maintain these professional standards, fact-checking network organizations such as the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) and the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN) have established codes of standards, and fact-checking organizations should comply with them in a substantive way.
Explore by Topic
- Artificial Intelligence
- Asia
- Big Data
- Climate
- Conspiracy Theories
- Content Moderation
- COVID-19
- Debunking
- Disinformation
- Editorial
- Education
- Elections
- Emotion
- Europe
- Fact-checking
- Fake News
- Gaming
- Healthcare
- Impact
- Information Bias
- Infrastructure
- Law & Government
- Mainstream Media
- Media Literacy
- Partisan Issues
- Philosophy
- Platform Regulation
- Platforms
- Politics
- Prebunking
- Propaganda
- Psychology
- Public Health
- Public Opinion
- Research
- Russia
- Search engines
- Social Media
- Sources
- Telegram
- Twitter/X
- Vaccines
- Youth
- Youtube