What Marketers Can Learn From The Fake News
Download File ===== https://byltly.com/2t7CRw
Predatory journals are not exactly the same as fake news organizations but they certainly are publishing papers of dubious quality. Some real journals are being hijacked and turned into fake journals. Finding these papers is not difficult.
Much in the same way that fake news is easily discoverable on Twitter and Facebook, fake journals and their contents are delivered via Google Scholar search. The question that often comes up is, what harm are predatory or fake open access (OA) journals having on real OA journals?
It's been only a few months since politicians started flinging around the term fake news in the U.S. But today, we go to another country that has been dealing with the phenomenon of fake news for years. Ukraine is where Russia tested and then rolled out fake news tactics - that is, pumping out propaganda and simultaneously working to undermine people's faith in a free press.
So what can Americans learn from Ukraine's experience? Gregory Warner went to find out. He's the host of our new podcast Rough Translation. It's a show that follows conversations we're having in the United States. And here's how they play out in some other corner of the world.
WARNER: Ruslan could look out his window and see the streets were peaceful. Barricades on the square in Kiev were now covered with fresh flowers. But Ukrainians who were not in the capital at the time got scared. In parts of Ukraine, people rose up against the post-revolutionary government. Quoting the Russian news stories about fascists, they begged Russian troops to save them. So Ruslan conceived a plan to fight back. He and some other journalists got together to publicly debunk these fake stories, which, at the time, felt really scary.
WARNER: To understand what was going on here, it helps to think of Ukraine is kind of two Ukraines, east and west. So the east borders Russia. It's got more Russian speakers, while the west borders Europe. It has more Ukrainian speakers. Ruslan says it was easy for Russian news to insert itself into this divide.
WARNER: Now, at first, StopFake was a success beyond what Ruslan and Margo had even imagined. The debunked stories - they were a hit on social media. Other news outlets in Ukraine picked up their stories. And more than that, the StopFake crew of volunteers - they felt like they were winning the war, a war for truth. And then the real war came. In Eastern Ukraine, separatists rose up to reject the government in Kiev, and they got help from Russia. And as Ruslan watched this real war splitting his country...
WARNER: Up until then, he'd known that fake news could inspire fear and distrust. He'd seen that. But now it seemed to him to plant ideas in people's heads. Fake news today could become tomorrow's reality. And so now if you drive out to the frontlines of the war in Eastern Ukraine, you see a place that this fake news phenomenon can lead. Journalists are seen as the instruments of war.
WARNER: When journalists arrive, the war starts. Three years since Ukraine began its fight with fake news, the country's real divisions are as bitter as ever. And the one institution that might've been seen as the go-between, the press, reporting one side to the other - they're not seen as reporting a war. They're seen as helping to wage it.
At the end of the day, fake news stories have a clearly defined purpose. When it comes to marketing your business, clearly define your objectives, plan methodically, determine how you will measure success, and continually a/b test creative.
There are five categories collectively referred to as fake news. Some of which are actually fake (disinformation), others down to human error or biases (misinformation). Either way they all have a very loose connection with the truth and basically sit on a continuum of intent to deceive.
The spread of blatantly false information about PepsiCo, including fake quotes from the CEO, saw their stock price fall by 3.75% immediately and remain depressed for some time after. New Balance had its brand message taken out of context and ended up flat bang in the middle of the deeply divisive US presidential election, being hated by both sides.
Q: For the robustness check of the launch of other fake news sites, you came up with two creative methods to approach this issue, how did you come up with them?
Q: Considering that the results talk about negative spillovers yet positive substitute effects, what implications do you think this research can provide for managers and marketers?
A: Fake news style advertising seems to work. However, the message is geared more toward policymakers and implications for consumers. It is easy for consumers to be persuaded by such messages, as can be seen by the large treatment effect. A few new consumers continue reaching the site through regular ads, but the draw is not as great as with fake news ads, which are able to bring in many more new visitors. I think this underscores the role of regulatory oversight in domains where consumers are likely to be susceptible to such false advertisements.
Fake news creators dig deeply into audience segmentation, so they know precisely the people they are aiming to reach, where they will find their audience online and what kind of media they will pay attention to. Smart marketing gives the message a better chance of landing.
To conduct the study, the researchers tracked roughly 126,000 cascades of news stories spreading on Twitter, which were cumulatively tweeted over 4.5 million times by about 3 million people, from the years 2006 to 2017.
In a political climate rife with accusations of "fake news," and plummeting confidence in social media platforms stemming from concerns about privacy, the topic of trust dominates marketing industry conferences and media headlines. At this year's ANA Media Conference, Marc Pritchard, chief brand officer of CPG giant Procter & Gamble, addressed the issues regarding the media supply chain. "Digital media continues to grow exponentially, and with it, a dark side persists," Pritchard said. "Waste continues to exist from lack of transparency and fraud." He added that "privacy breaches and consumer data misuse keep occurring. Unacceptable content continues to be available and is still being viewed alongside our brands."
So why should marketers trust TV? Not only is it safe content and free from data abuse issues, it's trusted by consumers and voters alike. According to the 2018 Research Now SSI Voter Funnel Study, which was conducted immediately following the 2018 midterm election, 59 percent of respondents said fake news was most prevalent on social media, while just 6 percent cited local broadcast TV. What's more, a 2019 GfK Media Comparisons Study found that local broadcast TV was the most trusted news source compared to all of the other media platforms, including digital and social.
Political campaign strategies are the ultimate exercise in marketing because there is no second chance. As political planners and buyers choose TV time and again, brand marketers should take notice. TV is trusted by consumers, raises awareness, drives action, and reaches the most people compared to any other medium. But don't take it from me. The headlines touting the benefits of TV-ad buying speak for themselves.
As you think about how to best allocate your resources in the context of fake news consider what sources people are telling us they trust, customize to your business, and adjust based on additional data. For example (PDF): While many place blame on traditional media for fueling fake news, according to the most recent Edelman Trust Barometer, people have become more engaged with it this year and trust it more than other sources.
Technology can help fix these problems: These more hopeful experts said the rising speed, reach and efficiencies of the internet, apps and platforms can be harnessed to rein in fake news and misinformation campaigns. Some predicted better methods will arise to create and promote trusted, fact-based news sources.
A number of respondents believe there will be policy remedies that move beyond whatever technical innovations emerge in the next decade. They offered a range of suggestions, from regulatory reforms applied to the platforms that aid misinformation merchants to legal penalties applied to wrongdoers. Some think the threat of regulatory reform via government agencies may force the issue of required identities and the abolition of anonymity protections for platform users.
Although research shows that older people share fake news on Facebook more often, she cautioned that she would not interpret that as evidence that younger people are any better at telling the difference between authentic and fictitious stories.
According to Bouygues, participants who played the game did not become measurably better and spotting fake news, likely because they were preoccupied with the mechanics of the game rather than the message it was trying to teach.
The misleading and propagandistic tendencies in American news reporting have been a part of public discussion from its earliest days as a republic (Innis, 2007; Sheppard, 2007). "Fake news" is hardly new (McKernon, 1925), and the term has been applied to a variety of distinct phenomenon ranging from satire to news, which one may find disagreeable (Jankowski, 2018; Tandoc et al., 2018). However, this problem has become increasingly acute in recent years with the Macquarie Dictionary declaring "fake news" the word of the year in 2016 (Lavoipierre, 2017). The international recognition of fake news as a problem (Pomerantsev and Weiss, 2014; Applebaum and Lucas, 2016) has led to a number of initiatives to mitigate perceived causes, with varying levels of success (Flanagin and Metzger, 2014; Horne and Adali, 2017; Sample et al., 2018). The inability to create a holistic solution continues to stymie researchers and vested parties. A significant contributor to the problem is the interdisciplinary nature of digital deception. While technology enables the rapid and wide dissemination of digitally deceptive data, the design and consumption of data rely on a mixture of psychology, sociology, political science, economics, linguistics, marketing, and fine arts. The authors for this effort discuss deception's history, both old and new, from an interdisciplinary viewpoint and then proceed to discuss how various disciplines contribute to aiding in the detection and countering of fake news narratives. A discussion of various fake news types (printed, staged events, altered photographs, and deep fakes) ensues with the various technologies being used to identify these; the shortcomings of those technologies and finally the insights offered by the other disciplines can be incorporated to improve outcomes. A three-point evaluation model that focuses on contextual data evaluation, pattern spread, and archival analysis of both the author and publication archives is introduced. While the model put forth cannot determine fact from fiction, the ability to measure distance from fact across various domains provides a starting point for evaluating the veracity of a new story. 2b1af7f3a8