The DOI matches its DataCite record; 46 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pandemic Populism: Facebook Pages of Alternative News Media and the Corona Crisis -- A Computational Content Analysis
Open accessAbstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has not only had severe political, economic, and societal effects, it has also affected media and communication systems in unprecedented ways. While traditional journalistic media has tried to adapt to the rapidly evolving situation, alternative news media on the Internet have given the events their own ideological spin. Such voices have been criticized for furthering societal confusion and spreading potentially dangerous "fake news" or conspiracy theories via social media and other online channels. The current study analyzes the factual basis of such fears in an initial computational content analysis of alternative news media's output on Facebook during the early Corona crisis, based on a large German data set from January to the second half of March 2020. Using computational content analysis, methods, reach, interactions, actors, and topics of the messages were examined, as well as the use of fabricated news and conspiracy theories. The analysis revealed that the alternative news media stay true to message patterns and ideological foundations identified in prior research. While they do not spread obvious lies, they are predominantly sharing overly critical, even anti-systemic messages, opposing the view of the mainstream news media and the political establishment. With this pandemic populism, they contribute to a contradictory, menacing, and distrusting worldview, as portrayed in detail in this analysis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“While they do not always explicitly promote conspiracy theories, they do contribute to their spreading (Boberg et al., 2020), and attract users with higher levels of conspiracy mentality (Frischlich, Kuhfeldt, et al., 2022).”
From The Seed of Doubt: Examining the Role of Alternative Social and News Media for the Birth of a Conspiracy Theory (2024) · cites this paper as Boberg et al., 2020
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(2003) · Journal of Machine Learning Research · doi:10.5555/944919.944937 · Cited by 32,337
The igraph software package for complex network research
Csárdi, G., & Nepusz, T. (2006) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 10,078
The Stanford CoreNLP Natural Language Processing Toolkit
Manning, C. D., Surdeanu, M., Bauer, J., Finkel, J. R., Bethard, S. J., & McClosky, D. (2014) · Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations (ACL Demo) · doi:10.3115/v1/p14-5010 · Cited by 7,252
Mudde, C. (2004) · Government and Opposition · doi:10.1111/j.1477-7053.2004.00135.x · Cited by 5,286
The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions
Bennett, W. L., & Livingston, S. G. (2018) · European Journal of Communication · doi:10.1177/0267323118760317 · Cited by 1,934
(2009) · Cited by 1,900
Prior exposure increases perceived accuracy of fake news
Pennycook, G., Cannon, T. D., & Rand, D. G. (2018) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/xge0000465 · Cited by 1,268 · cited 1×
“It is noteworthy that this information mix is much more likely to contribute to the feared “infodemic” (WHO, 2020a) as media users are usually better in noting highly non-credible sources and disinformation bits (Pennycook et al., 2018; Pennycook and Rand, 2019).”
BackgroundThe attention economy: understanding the new currency of business
(2002) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.39-4674 · Cited by 1,125
topicmodels : An R Package for Fitting Topic Models
Grün, B., & Hornik, K. (2011) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v040.i13 · Cited by 1,072
Fighting misinformation on social media using crowdsourced judgments of news source quality
Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2019) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1806781116 · Cited by 947 · cited 1×
“It is noteworthy that this information mix is much more likely to contribute to the feared “infodemic” (WHO, 2020a) as media users are usually better in noting highly non-credible sources and disinformation bits (Pennycook et al., 2018; Pennycook and Rand, 2019).”
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Benkler, Y., Faris, R., Roberts, H., and Zuckerman, E. (2017). Study: Breitbart-led right-wing media ecosystem altered broader media agenda. Columbia Journalism Review , pages 1-12.
- Jowett, G. S. and O'Donnell, V. (2012). Propaganda and persuasion . SAGE Publications, Inc., Los Angeles; USA, fifth edition.
- Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Kalogeropoulos, A., and Nielsen, R. K. (2019). Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2019. Technical report, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Oxford; UK.
- Robert Koch-Institut (2020d). Epidemiologisches Bulletin: SARS-CoV-2 in Deutschland und Ziele von Infektionsschutzmaßnahmen. Technical Report 7, Berlin.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Shahsavari, S., Holur, P., Wang, T., Tangherlini, T. R., & Roychowdhury, V. (2020) · Journal of Computational Social Science · doi:10.1007/s42001-020-00086-5 · Cited by 420
Coninck, D. D., Frissen, T., Matthijs, K., d’Haenens, L., Lits, G., Champagne-Poirier, O., Carignan, M.-È., David, M. D., Pignard-Cheynel, N., Salerno, S., et al. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.646394 · Cited by 359
From populism to the “plandemic”: why populists believe in COVID-19 conspiracies
Eberl, J., Huber, R. A., & Greussing, E. (2021) · Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties · doi:10.1080/17457289.2021.1924730 · Cited by 255
Schulze, H., Hohner, J., Greipl, S., Girgnhuber, M., Desta, I., & Rieger, D. (2022) · Convergence The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies · doi:10.1177/13548565221104977 · Cited by 126
Mellado, C., Hallin, D. C., Ulloa, L. R. C., Alfaro, R., Jackson, D., Humanes, M. L., Márquez-Ramírez, M., Mick, J., Mothes, C., Lin, C. I.-H., et al. (2021) · Digital Journalism · doi:10.1080/21670811.2021.1942114 · Cited by 117
Metadata
- Authors
- Boberg, S., Quandt, T., Schatto-Eckrodt, T., & Frischlich, L.
- Affiliations
- University of Münster (DE)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2020
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2004.02566
- OpenAlex
- W3015170206
- Cited by
- 141
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 20
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Communication › Communication and COVID-19 Impact
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Populism, Right-Wing Movements
- Keywords
- alternative press, COVID-19 pandemic, Facebook, conspiracy theories, fake news, social media, political polarization
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
