Analysis of User-Generated Comments on Rumor Correction YouTube Videos

This research investigates how Internet users comment in response to rumor corrections posted on social media. The focus is specifically on the degree to which aggressive language is used. As the test cases for investigation, the research looks into two rumor corrections on YouTube. The rumors were set in the context of the riots and protests in Jakarta following the Indonesian presidential election in 2019. A total of 1,000 comments (500 comments from each of the two cases) was admitted for content analysis. In one case, anti-correction voice was dominant, highlighting the failure of the rumor correction to refute the rumor. In the other, pro-correction voice was dominant, indicating the success of the rumor correction. Aggressive language was widely used in the latter. Implications of the findings are highlighted

The Muslim Manchurian Candidate: Barack Obama, Rumors, and Quotidian Hermeneutics

This article examines the rumors about President Barack Obama which accused him of being Muslim, unpatriotic, and a terrorist sympathizer. Despite ample evidence that the rumors were patently false, on Election Day, fully 10% of the voters continued to believe that he was Muslim. In addition, many continued to harbor the pernicious racial, socio-ethnic, and religious biases that shaped the rumors. This article asks, and answers “why” the rumors persisted. This article provides an answer from a unique communication theory perspective. This article first mines the sources of the Obama rumors, and how those rumors were amplified in the media. Next, using semiotic concepts, the article illuminates how the Obama rumors played upon themes of patriotism, “American-ness,” race, and Islamophobia. This article then takes its most novel approach by setting forth the contours of rumor communication, and the central role quotidian hermeneutics played in embedding the Obama rumors. “Quotidian hermeneutics” is a method by which to analyze everyday conversations. Specifically, conversations amongst in-group members have an underappreciated impact on voters’ source of information and voting decisions. By examining the characteristics and conversational properties of rumors, this article demonstrates how peer groups engaged in quotidian discourse helped re-frame, mediate, and reinforce the Obama rumors. The value of this article lies in two facts: first, the rumors of Obama’s Muslim allegiances were believed in numbers sufficient to tip the election. Second, with regards to issue-based decision making, interpersonal communication represents a significant source of political information and voter influence. Thus, what likely voters discussed in everyday conversation, and how they discussed the Obama rumors provides one answer as to why the Obama rumors persisted

Countering Anti-Vaccination Rumors on Twitter

This study examined the effects of the counter-rumor on changes in the belief about the anti-vaccination claim, anxiety associated with the rumor, intentions to vaccinate a child and share the rumor. Particularly, we tested whether argument strength, source expertise, as well as the recipient’s previously held attitude toward vaccination, could affect these outcomes. First, the pilot tests were conducted to check source expertise (N = 161) and argument strength (N = 74; N = 73) and select sources and messages used in the experiment. A 2 (argument strength: strong vs. weak) x 2 (expertise source: high vs. low) between-subjects factor experimental design was employed, and we conducted an online experiment (N = 400) set up in the Qualtrics. Participants were recruited via Prolific, a crowdsourcing website. The results showed that attitude toward mandatory vaccination had an impact on the change in the belief about the anti-vaccination claim. We also found that source expertise had a significant impact on the change in anxiety. Those who read the counter-rumor from CDC reported greater decrease in their anxiety than those who read the counter-rumor from a layperson user. This finding suggests that heuristic processing occurs in the reception of the anti-vaccination rumor and the counter-rumor that refutes the claim, such that people are less likely to feel anxious about the anti-vaccination rumor when they receive the counter-rumor from high expertise source. Furthermore, the results showed a significant interaction between argument strength and source expertise on the change in vaccination intention. When participants read the counter-rumor from CDC, they reported greater increase in their intention to vaccinate a child in response to the strong argument than they did in response to the weak argument. On the contrary, when they read the counter-rumor from a layperson user, the opposite pattern appeared, such that they reported greater increase in their vaccination intention in response to the weak argument than they did in response to the strong argument. This finding reveals that cue-message congruency plays a crucial role in increasing the effectiveness of the counter-rumor and promoting behavioral change. The theoretical implications of the current findings are discussed in light of cognitive dissonance theory, the dual-process model of information processing, and online rumor literature. The practical implications of the findings are further discussed with regard to designing strategies and interventions that mitigate the harmful consequences of health-related rumors

The Muslim Manchurian Candidate: Barack Obama, Rumors, and Quotidian Hermeneutics

This article examines the rumors about President Barack Obama which accused him of being Muslim, unpatriotic, and a terrorist sympathizer. Despite ample evidence that the rumors were patently false, on Election Day, fully 10% of the voters continued to believe that he was Muslim. In addition, many continued to harbor the pernicious racial, socio-ethnic, and religious biases that shaped the rumors. This article asks, and answers “why” the rumors persisted. This article provides an answer from a unique communication theory perspective. This article first mines the sources of the Obama rumors, and how those rumors were amplified in the media. Next, using semiotic concepts, the article illuminates how the Obama rumors played upon themes of patriotism, “American-ness,” race, and Islamophobia. This article then takes its most novel approach by setting forth the contours of rumor communication, and the central role quotidian hermeneutics played in embedding the Obama rumors. “Quotidian hermeneutics” is a method by which to analyze everyday conversations. Specifically, conversations amongst in-group members have an underappreciated impact on voters’ source of information and voting decisions. By examining the characteristics and conversational properties of rumors, this article demonstrates how peer groups engaged in quotidian discourse helped re-frame, mediate, and reinforce the Obama rumors. The value of this article lies in two facts: first, the rumors of Obama’s Muslim allegiances were believed in numbers sufficient to tip the election. Second, with regards to issue-based decision making, interpersonal communication represents a significant source of political information and voter influence. Thus, what likely voters discussed in everyday conversation, and how they discussed the Obama rumors provides one answer as to why the Obama rumors persisted

Intentions to Trust and Share Online Health Rumors : An Experiment with Medical Professionals

With the rise of fake news and doctored narratives on the Internet, research on online rumors is growing. Previous works often dealt with either individuals’ trust in rumors or their willingness to share. Juxtaposing both in the same study, the aim of this paper is to investigate medical professionals’ intentions to trust and share online health rumors as a function of their personal involvement, the rumor type, and the presence of counter-rumors. Personal involvement refers to individuals’ perceived relevance of a rumor. Two common types of rumors include dread and wish. Counter-rumors are messages that debunk rumors. A within-participants experiment was conducted with 60 participants, divided evenly among doctors, nurses and medical students, each of whom was exposed to eight cancer-related rumors. Rumor type and the presence of counter-rumors were induced. Personal involvement, intention to trust, and intention to share were measured using a questionnaire. Results showed that personal involvement compelled intentions to trust and share. Dread rumors triggered intentions to trust and share more than did wish rumors. The presence of counter-rumors lowered intention to trust, but not intention to share. Moreover, rumor type moderated the relation between personal involvement and intentions to trust and share

Impact of the truth commission on the social representations of history in Brazil

This thesis aimed to investigate the social representations of the dictatorship (1964-1985) in Brazil during the process of Truth and Reconciliation Commission – TRC – report release and the political crisis (2014-2018) as well as the TRC impact and appraisals. It is mainly based on the social representations theory, collective memory and studies about TRCs impact. Three studies were conducted. The first, aimed to investigate the social representations about the TRC in Brazil from the spontaneous discourse about the TRC final report in December 2014. Comments (N=322) were collected in the three major newspapers websites in Brazil: "Folha de São Paulo", "O Globo" and "O Estado de São Paulo" during the 48 hours after the news publication. They were transcribed into a textual corpus which was submitted to a lexical analyze on the software Alceste. Results showed three classes emerging, all of them critical against the TRC or the government: Violence perpetrated by leftist militants; Critics against the government and; State agent as victims. A radicalized discourse that justifies the human rights violations committed during the dictatorship as well as revisionist theories that negates the existence of a dictatorship could be observed. The classes seemed to represent the public of each newspaper. The second study aimed to analyze Brazilian TRC appraisals and its relation with social variables such as age and political positioning as well as with the social representations of the dictatorial past comparing three periods: pre, during and post the political crisis that ended up with Dilma Rousseff's impeachment. The sample consisted of 728 volunteer participants. Results showed that knowledge, social sharing about the TRC and the dictatorship, as well as the TRC positive appraisals increased during the political crisis. Moreover, most of the TRC positive appraisals were associated with left-wing political positioning and victimization. The associations between TRC appraisals and political positioning also increased during the political crisis. The third study aimed to investigate the structure of social representations of the dictatorship in Brazil comparing with a similar previous study (Sá, Oliveira, Castro, Vetere, & Carvalho, 2009). A 238 general sample answered questions about their knowledge, attitudes and emotions regarding the dictatorship. Moreover, a word association task was conducted with the inductor stimulus “military regime”. A prototypical analysis was conducted in IRAMUEQ software. Results showed that, though social representations of dictatorship are still critical, some elements that represent it positively are standing out, even in the central core. These positive representations seem to be anchored in political positioning and to be related to absence of information about the dictatorship in school. Results are discussed considering the political context of crisis, the social representations, collective memory and media theories comparing with previous studies about TRCs impact in other countries

Believing the unbelievable: the myth of Russians 'with snow on their boots' in the United Kingdom, 1914

PublishedArticle“This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Cultural and Social History on1 May 2015, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/ 10.2752/147800414X13802176314528.”In the opening months of the First World War, a rumour spread across the United Kingdom that Russian soldiers – identified by the ‘snow on their boots’ – had landed in Scotland en route to the Western Front. Despite being relegated to history’s footnotes as a comical but meaningless episode, this article takes the rumour seriously. Unconcerned with questions of ‘truth’ (the rumour was dismissed as fantastical by late October 1914), I will argue that the real value of this story is in what it reveals about British society at the outbreak of war. The rumour emerged as the British Expeditionary Force entered its first big test of the Great War – the battle of Mons – which would result in Germany’s first great victory and resulting in thousands of casualties. As such the rumour can be interpreted as a form of ‘secular apparition’ bringing consolation to many. It was one of the ways ordinary people made sense of their newly threatening world