LINKEDINCOMMENTMORE

The fight against fake news is not just being waged by Google, Facebook and big media companies.

They are joined in the battle by academics and data scientists who started work on the subject years before bogus news stories were suspected of helping sway the 2016 presidential election.

Their work has yielded tools that help track how “alternative facts” spread, and others that let you identify fake stories or block them altogether.

Some of these are still baby steps, but they’re a key, if largely unsung, part of the effort to tamp down the spread of fake stories.

And the researchers were there first.

For Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia, a research scientist at Indiana University, the phenomenon first caught his eye during the Ebola crisis in 2014.

“We started seeing a lot of content that was spreading, completely fabricated claims about importations of Ebola, (such as) entire towns in Texas being under quarantine,” he says. “What caught our attention was that these claims were created using names of publications that sounded like newspapers. And they were getting a lot of traction on social media.”

So he helped create a tool tracking how unsubstantiated claims spread online.

Deciphering Twitter rumors

Tanushree Mitra, a doctoral student at the Georgia Institute of Technology, began a project three years ago to see how misinformation and fake news spread through Twitter. At the time, she says, “companies like Facebook and Twitter were not paying much attention.”

What attracted her to the project was the prevalence of fake news that spread online following natural disasters such as Superstorm Sandy in 2012. When she saw that people were sharing a lot of incorrect or misleading information about the events, Mitra decided to track both big stories and smaller rumors with the goal of creating an app that could help ordinary people sort fact from fiction so they can make decisions that could be crucial to their well-being.

Mitra and her fellow researchers scanned 66 million tweets linked to nearly 1,400 real-world events to identify words and phrases linked to perceived levels of credibility. Looking at tweets surrounding news events in 2014 and 2015 — including the Ebola crisis, the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris and the death of Eric Garner in a confrontation of police officers in New York City — they asked people to judge tweets based on how credible they thought the posts were.

Words such as “eager,” “terrific” and “undeniable” were linked to more credible posts, while words such as “ha,” “grins” and “suspects” were the opposite. A computer matched the humans’ opinions 68 percent of the time. The next step, an app, could help people rate the credibility of tweets and other social media posts.

Tracking hoaxes

A group of researchers at Indiana University have created an online tool called Hoaxy that seeks to visualize “the spread of claims and related fact checking online.” Although it’s still a work in progress, Hoaxy can trace the origin of, for instance, the false claim that millions of votes in the 2016 presidential election were cast by “illegal aliens.” Type in your search terms and Hoaxy will report back with stories that spread the claims, as well as fact-checking articles that debunked it.

In this instance, the claim goes back to a November article from Infowars.com that was shared 17,961 times on Twitter and 52,200 times on Facebook, according to Hoaxy. The site only tracks actual links people shared, so it misses anything that’s paraphrased or posted without a link.

A data visualization tool shows the intertwined web of Twitter users who spread both the claims and the fact checks, and how they are connected to one another. The researchers focused on Twitter because the service makes more data available to the public, which makes it easier to use in data-tracking tools than Facebook.

Lead a horse to water

Tools like Hoaxy or rumor-identification apps are only helpful if people use them. The same goes for another approach — using a web browser plug-in to identify or block fake-news stories. For instance, the Chrome extension “Fake News Alert,” created last year, says it will tell you when you are visiting a site “known for spreading fake news.”

But there are a few drawbacks. Many people aren’t willing to go to the trouble of adding new extensions to their browser. And such extensions only work on the desktop version of Chrome, not its mobile counterpart.

“Fake News Alert” also uses a widely circulated but oft-criticized list of fake and misleading news sites assembled by a Merrimack College professor. The list casts a very broad net and includes some established, but highly partisan sites such as the right-wing Breitbart News and the left-wing Occupy Democrats.

A final obstacle: While fake news has been in the real news a lot, many people simply aren’t that aware of it.

“A lot of consumers are not savvy about it,” says Larry Chiagouris, a marketing professor at Pace University who follows the fake news phenomenon. “And of those that are — and it’s a small number— not a lot of them add plug-ins to browsers.”

Educate the people

Chiagouris believes we are at the “beginning of the beginning” when it comes to defining just what fake news is and how to combat it. But he and other experts say technological solutions like apps and plug-ins are unlikely to get to the root of the problem.

The real solution, he says, will start in school: “not college, grammar school.”

The better educated and informed the public is, the more likely they are going to be “asking questions and exploring alternative sources of information,” says Mike Posner, co-founder and co-director of the NYU Stern Center for Business and Human Rights.

“What you really want is people saying they want to see different sides of an issue, looking at things by people who don’t agree with me, so one (part of the solution) is public education.”

Where do you get news?

Efforts to identify fake or unconfirmed news reports are occurring worldwide. One site, fakenewswatch.com, has compiled this partial breakdown of websites, identifying them as purveyors of fake or hoax news, satire and click bait.

Fake/Hoax News Websites

AmericanNews.com

BigAmericanNews.com

Cap News (twitter.com/capnews)

ChristWire.org

CivicTribune.com

ClickHole.com

CreamBMP.com

DCGazette.com

DailyCurrant.com

DCClothesLine.com

DerfMagazine.com

DrudgeReport.com.co

DuhProgressive.com

EmpireNews.com

EnduringVision.com

Indecision Forever (www.cc.com/indecision)

MSNBC.co

MSNBC.website

MediaMass.net

NationalReport.net

NewsBiscuit.com

News-Hound.com

NewsMutiny.com

PoliticalEars.com

RealNewsRightNow.com

RileNews.com

Sprotspickle.com

TheNewsNerd.com

TheUsPatriot.com

WitScience.org

Satire Websites

TheOnion.com

AmplifyingGlass.com

Duffleblog.com

EmpireSports.co

GomerBlog.com

Huzlers.com

iTagLive.com/

Newslo.com

NahaDaily.com

Private-eye.co.uk

RockCityTimes.com

TheLapine.ca

TheSpoof.com

WeeklyWorldNews.com

WorldNewsDailyReport.com

Clickbait Websites

21stCenturyWire.com

ActivistPost.com

BeforeItsNews.com

BigPZone.com

Chronicle.su

CoastToCoastAM.com

ConsciousLifeNews.com

ConservativeOutfitters.com

ConspiracyWire (WideAwakeAmerica.com)

CountdownToZeroTime.com

CounterPsyOps.com

DailyBuzzLive.com

Disclose.tv

FPRNradio.com

GeoEngineeringWatch.org

GlobalResearch.ca

GovtSlaves.info

GulagBound.com

JonesReport.com

HangTheBankers.com

HumansAreFree.com

Infowars.com

IntelliHub.com

LewRockwell.com

LibertyTalk.fm

LibertyVideos.org

LMR (LibertyMovementRadio.com)

MegynKelly.us

NaturalNews.com

NewsWire-24.com

NoDisInfo.com

NowTheEndBegins.com

PakAlertPress.com

PoliticalBlindSpot.com

PrisonPlanet.com

PrisonPlanet.tv

RealFarmacy.com

RedFlagNews.com

TruthFrequencyRadio.com

TheDailySheeple.com

TheRunDownLive.com

UnconfirmedSources.com

VeteransToday.com

WakingUpWisconsin.com

WorldTruth.tv

Source: fakenewswatch.com

LINKEDINCOMMENTMORE

Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Read or Share this story: http://detne.ws/2k5Et79