Understanding deception strategies to fight fake news
Problem
We turn to the Internet as our main source of news and information, but unfortunately not everything we consume online is reliable or trustworthy. We might sometimes find ourselves at the mercy of fake news – false information disguised as a credible news source. While fake news is not unique to the Internet, it has recently become a big problem in today’s digital world.
While some people may be diligent enough to differentiate fact from fiction, the increasing complexity of fake news headlines and content has posed a new challenge. We see many examples of how fake news ran rampant during the peak of COVID-19 when public health authorities struggled to convey accurate information to the public because of external and fake pieces of information.
Opportunity
IPUR ran a study using an online game to see if it could increase players’ ability to identify online mis/disinformation. The objective of the game experiment was to help individuals internalise “early mental warning signals” so they could identify potential deception attempts and avoid them. The intention of the study was to expose players to five deception techniques used by fake news producers: 1) impersonation, 2) emotional content, 3) polarisation, 4) conspiracy, and 5) discrediting opponents.
Intervention
One framework that the study tried to communicate through the game was the use of the five deception strategies. These are the basic “red flag” indicators that could suggest the content behind a message or video has sinister intent to drive you away from actual critical thinking.
1. Impersonation: Posing as a real person, legitimate news website or organisation by mimicking their appearance.
2. Emotional content: Content that is not necessarily “fake” or “real” but deliberately plays into people’s basic emotions, such as fear, anger, or empathy.
3. Polarisation: Deliberate attempts to expand the gap between the political left and the political right and drive people away from the political centre. Typically also involves the use of “false amplification” of existing grievances or making fringe views look like they are more mainstream than they are.
4. Conspiracy: Spreading the belief that unexplained events are orchestrated by a covert group or organisation with sinister intentions
5. Discrediting opponents: Attacking the source of the criticism by deflections such as “you are fake news!” or denying the problem exist.
Beyond the intervention itself, the study also use the game as a vehicle to open a conversation into risk perceptions about fake news. The key objective was to develop a deep contextual understanding of how people think about the risks and appeal of fake news, and what factors mitigate those risk perceptions.