Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/129015| 題名: | 政治新聞的真與假 : 閱聽人對真實的理解與辨偽 Why the political news is not the truth. |
作者: | 黃馨儀 Huang, Hsin-Yi |
貢獻者: | 蘇蘅 黃馨儀 Huang,Hsin-Yi |
關鍵詞: | 假新聞 閱聽人 事實查核 社群媒體 媒體素養 政黨立場 fake news fact-checking social media media literacy party tendency |
日期: | 2020 | 上傳時間: | 2-Mar-2020 | 摘要: | 當政治假新聞成為全球議題，面臨2020年總統大選的台灣，同樣受到來自內外的資訊侵略，閱聽人在立場與訊息多元的社群媒體上，是否具有判斷資訊真偽的能力，抑或成為成為假新聞無形散播的推手。本研究透過「社群媒體政治性使用動機」、「媒體素養」、「政黨立場」、「政治資訊辨偽動機」等因素，試討論上述因素如何影響閱聽人的查核行為。\n\n 本研究透過網路問卷（N=415），「社群媒體政治性使用動機」方面，不論是資訊蒐集動機、人際互動動機均與查核行為呈正相關。「媒體素養」程度與查核行為呈正相關。「政黨立場」以台灣民眾黨的支持者，其查核行為程度最高；國民黨的支持者最低。「政治資訊辨偽動機」中，研究發現閱聽人較高頻率地瀏覽與自己立場相同的對象貼文，然而卻對立場相左的對象貼文具有較高的查核動機，而辨偽動機與查核行為同樣呈現正相關。\n\n 學界過去較少探索閱聽人與假新聞間的聯繫，希望透過本研究探索哪些因素影響閱聽人判斷政治資訊的真偽，對未來假新聞研究與實務選舉有所貢獻。 Social media has had a huge impact on politics by shaping public discourse and revamping civic engagement. Taiwan will hold its presidential election in 2020. However, Taiwan has one of the worst disinformation problems in the world and has to combat the spread of fake news and disinformation ahead of the 2020 election. In order to know how people would have the ability to do fact-checking or not, this study conducts an online questionnaire of 415 Taiwanese respondents to explore which factor can influence behavior of fact-checking.\n\n Results of this survey show that the motivation of information-collection and interpersonal interaction has positive correlation with the behavior of fact-checking. In addition, media literacy also has positive correlation with the motivation and behavior for fact-checking. On Party tendency, the supporters of Taiwan People`s Party have the strongest motivation for fact-checking and the supporters of Kuomintang Party have the least motivation to verify the facts. |
參考文獻: | 〈2018台灣網路報告〉（2019年1月10日）。取自TWNIC網頁\n https://report.twnic.tw/2018/\n〈國人的公民素養民意調查--中〉（2019年8月25日）。取自財團法人黃昆輝教授教\n 育基金會網頁http://hkh-edu.com/news2019/news08_25.html\n王劭文（2018）。《網路「同溫層」現象初探：以婚姻平權臉書社群為例》。國立政治\n 大學傳播碩士學位論文。\n王泰俐（2013）。〈「臉書選舉」？ 2012年台灣總統大選社群媒體對政治參與行\n 為的影響〉。《東吳政治學刊》，31(1): 1-52。\n王嵩音（2017）。〈社交媒體政治性使用行為與公民參與之研究〉。《資訊社會研\n 究》，(32): 83-111。\n尹玫君（1992）。〈臺南地區大學生電腦素養內涵之研究〉。《臺南師院學報》，25: 65-\n 82。\n左宗宏、李俊憲（2010）。〈台灣報紙報導選舉新聞偏差現象研究—以 2000 與\n 2004 年總統大選為例〉。《傳播與社會學刊》，11:141-163。\n江靜之（2016）。〈記者求真路：論新聞查證〉，「2016中華傳播學會年會」，嘉\n 義縣民雄。\n林美和（1996）。〈資訊素養與終身學習的關係〉。《社教雙月刊》，73: 7-12。\n林照真（2018）。〈假新聞情境初探: 以阿拉伯世界的資訊逆流為例〉。《傳播研\n 究與實踐》，8(1): 1-26。\n朱則剛（2005）。〈加拿大媒體素養教育探討〉。《圖書資訊學刊》，3(1): 1-13。\n何欣潔、李映昕（2017 年 7 月 24 日）。〈香火戰爭：假新聞、假假新聞與中國\n 因素〉，《端傳媒》。取自 https://theinitium.com/article/no-incense-stick-china/\n周淑萍（2019年7月22日）。〈LINE 推訊息查證平台 真假訊息秒回覆 趨勢防詐達\n 人功能多元〉，《蘋果日報》。取自\n https://tw.lifestyle.appledaily.com/daily/20190722/38397849/\n吳尚軒（2018年8月20日）。〈「大奶薇薇」「吃B」到「走味的咖啡」 政治諷刺脫\n 口秀來了！〉，《風傳媒》。取自https://www.storm.mg/article/479461\n吳柏軒（2018年12月11日）。〈台大新聞研究所教授王泰俐研究：假新聞確實\n 影響投票〉，《自由時報》。取自 \n https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/politics/paper/1253193\n杜兆倫（2018）。《謠言分藍綠？政治傾向與社群媒體謠言傳播之關聯性研究》。台灣\n 大學新聞研究所學位論文。\n胡元輝（2009）。政治偏差大，台灣選舉南公正。財團法人卓越新聞獎基金會。\n 取自https://www.feja.org.tw/37703。\n胡元輝（2018）。〈造假有效、更正無力？ 第三方事實查核機制初探〉。《傳\n 播研究與實踐》，8(2): 43-73。\n科技部傳播調查資料庫一期第四次（2015）。〈政治傳播與公民傳播〉。《台灣傳播調查\n 資料庫》。取自http://www.crctaiwan.nctu.edu.tw/AnnualSurvey.asp\n科技部傳播調查資料庫二期第二次（2018）。〈媒介使用與社會互動〉。《台灣傳播調查\n 資料庫》。取自\n http://www.crctaiwan.nctu.edu.tw/AnnualSurvey_detail.asp?ASD_ID=34\n施達妮（2018）。〈數位時代的假新聞〉。《漢學研究通訊》，(37)3: 7-13。\n徐美苓（2015）。〈影響新聞可信度與新聞素養效能因素之探討〉。《中華傳播學\n 刊》，(27): 99-136。\n張慧貞（2007）。《網路政治新聞識讀與政治冷漠-以台北地區大學生為例》。國立臺北\n 教育大學教育傳播與科技研究所學位論文。\n陳竫詒（2019年5月27日）。〈不只抓到了，還打贏了？芬蘭如何對抗假新聞之戰〉，\n 《天下雜誌》。取自https://www.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=5095369\n楊明珠（2018年10月6日）。〈讀賣回顧關西機場事件 台灣面臨假新聞危\n 機〉，《中央社》。取自 \n https://www.cna.com.tw/news/aopl/201810060004.aspx\n簡恒宇（2018年11月20日）。〈反智時代》假新聞為何氾濫成災？美國KUSO\n 網站實驗：捏造的內容愈極端，就愈多人要瘋傳！〉，《風傳媒》。取自\n https://www.storm.mg/article/636178?srcid=73746f726d2e6d675f6e756c6c_\n 1560236647\n劉正山（2009）。〈2008 年總統大選競選期間政黨支持者 選擇性接觸媒體傾向的分\n 析〉，《選舉研究》，16(2): 51-71。\n劉昌德（2017年4月7日）。〈後真相時代，誰來查核假新聞〉，《媒體改造學 \n 社》。取自http://twmedia.org/archives/1665。\n劉揚銘、陳伯璿、胡舜詅、周昱璇（2016年2月1日）。〈解讀Ptt：台灣最有影響力\n 的網路社群〉，《數位時代。》取自\n https://www.bnext.com.tw/article/38609/bn-2016-01-29-161210-178\n劉惠卿（2009）。〈電視報導新聞議題之政黨偏差研究－以 TVBS-N 與 SET-N 報導\n 312 維新館事件為例〉，《傳播與管理研究》9(1): 33-64。 劉致昕（2019年4月23日）。〈深入全球假新聞之都，看「境外網軍」是如何煉成\n 的？〉，《報導者》。取自https://www.twreporter.org/a/cyberwarfare-units- \n disinformation-fake-news-north-macedonia\n劉慧雯（2017）。〈建構 「倫理閱聽人」: 試論社群媒體使用者的理論意涵〉，《新聞學 \n 研究》，(131): 87-125。\n黃敦晴（2018年8月21日）。〈史丹福大學：82%學生無法分辨新聞和置入性 \n 行銷，如何教孩子辨別假新聞〉，《親子天下》。取自\n https://www.parenting.com.tw/article/5077638。\n創市際雙週刊第一Ｏ五期（2018年3月15日）。《創市際雙週刊》。取自 \n http://www.ixresearch.com/reports\n閻岩、周樹華（2014）。〈媒體偏見：客觀體現和主觀感知〉。《傳播與社會學\n 刊》，(30): 227-264。\n蔡又晴（2019年4月21日）。〈印度大選「真相之戰」：假新聞比官方聲明更能獲得民\n 眾共鳴〉，《關鍵評論網》。取自https://www.thenewslens.com/article/117554\n蕭怡靖（2006）。〈台灣閱報民眾的人口結構及政治態度之變遷－1992 至 2004 年〉。 \n 《台灣民主季刊》，3(4): 37-70。\n羅文輝（2013）。〈報紙與電視可信度：1993、1998和2003年的比較研究〉。《台灣的\n 社會變遷1985-2005：傳播與政治行為》，65-91。\n羅文輝、王慧馨、侯志欽（2007）。〈2004 年台灣報紙總統選舉新聞之政治偏\n 差〉。《選舉研究》，14 (2): 95-120。\n羅文輝、王慧馨、侯志欽（1998）。〈如何提升新聞的正確性: 一種新查證方法\n 的實驗設計〉。《新聞學研究》，(56), 269-296。\n羅世宏（2018）。〈關於假新聞的批判思考：老問題、新挑戰與可能的多重解\n 方〉。《資訊社會研究》，(35): 51-85。\n盧鴻毅（2015）。〈媒體報導的健康資訊重要性及可信度感知對健康資訊尋求行為的影\n 響〉。《傳播與社會學刊》，(34): 89-115。\n\nAlbright, J.(2017). Welcome to the era of fake new. Media and Communication,5:87-\n 89.\nAllcott, H.& Gentzkow, M.(2017, Spring). Social media and fake news in the 2016 \n election. Journal of Economics Perspectives, 31(2): 211-236.\nAshley, S., Maksl, A., & Craft, S. (2013). Developing a news media literacy\n scale. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 68(1), 7-21.\nAssael, H.(1998). Consumer behavior and marketing action. South-Western College\n Publishing.\nBerlo, D. K. (1960). The process of communication: An introduction to theory and\n practice. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.\nBessi, A., Coletto, M., Davidescu, G. A., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., & Quattrociocchi,\n W. (2015). Science vs conspiracy: Collective narratives in the age of\n misinformation. PloS one, 10(2).\nBessi, A., Petroni, F., Del Vicario, M., Zollo, F., Anagnostopoulos, A., Scala, A., &\n Quattrociocchi, W. (2015). Viral misinformation: The role of homophily\n and polarization. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the WWW 2015\n Companion, Florence, Italy.\nBoh Podgornik, B., Dolničar, D., Šorgo, A., & Bartol, T. (2016). Development, testing, and \n validation of an information literacy test (ILT) for higher education. Journal of the\n Association for Information Science and Technology, 67, 2420-2436.\nBorenstrin, S. (2019, January 10). Elderly, conservatives shared more Facebook\n fakery in 2016. AP News. Retrieved from\n https://www.apnews.com/c2e7517984a64c6a922e84d550e1e041.\nBoulianne, S. (2015). Social media use and participation: A meta-analysis of current\n research. Information, Communication & Society, 18 , 524-538.\nBruun, H. (2014). Conceptualizations of the audience in political talk show production.\n European Journal of Communication, 29(1), 3-16\nCacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1984). The need for cognition: Relationship to attitudinal\n processes. Social perception in clinical and counseling psychology, 2, 113-140.\nCadwalladr, C. (2017, May 7). The great British Brexit robbery: how our democracy\n was hijacked. The Guardian. Retrieved from\n https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/07/the-great-british-\n brexit-robbery-hijacked-democracy\nCampbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., and Strokes, D. E. (1960). The American\n Voter. Chicago, CHI: University of Chicago Press.\nCohen, A. R., Stotland, E., & Wolfe, D. M. (1955). An experimental investigation of need for\n cognition. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(2), 291.\nCook, J., & Lewandowsky, S. (2011). The debunking handbook. Sevloid Art. \nChadwick, A., Vaccari, C., & O’Loughlin, B. (2018). Do tabloids poison the well of\n social media? Explaining democratically dysfunctional news sharing. New\n Media & Society, 20(11), 4255-4274.\nChen, Z., & Chan, M. (2017). Motivations for social media use and impact on\n political participation in China: A cognitive and communication mediation\n approach. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 20(2), 83-90.\nConroy M, Feezell J. T., & Guerrero, M. (2012). Facebook and political engagement:\n a study of online political group membership and offline political engagement.\n Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1535-1546.\nDutton, W. H., Fernandez, L. (2019). How Susceptible Are Internet Users? \n Intermedia, 46(4), 36-40.\nHorton, C. (2018, November 22). Specter of Meddling by Beijing Looms Over \n Taiwan’s Elections. The New York Times. Retrieved from\n https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/22/world/asia/taiwan-elections-\n meddling.html\nHow People Help Fight False News. (2018, June 21). Retrieved from\n https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/06/inside-feed-how-people-help-fight-\n false-news/\nHoward, P. N., Bolsover, G., Kollanyi, B., Bradshaw, S., & Neudert, L. M. (2017). Junk\n news and bots during the US election: What were Michigan voters sharing over\n Twitter. CompProp, OII, Data Memo.\nFestinger, L. (1956). When prophecy fails: A social and psychological study of a\n modern group that predicted the destination of the world. New York, \n NY: Harper.\nFestinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University\n Press.\nFico, F., Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford \n University Press. & Cote, W. (2002). Partisan and structural balance of election\n stories on the 1998 governor’s race in Michigan. Mass Communication & Society,\n 5(2):165-182.\nFlaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online\n news consumption. Public opinion quarterly, 80(S1), 298-320.\nFlynn, D. J., Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2017). The nature and origins of misperceptions:\n Understanding false and unsupported beliefs about politics. Political Psychology, \n 38(Supp.1), 127-150.\nGans, H. J. (1979). Deciding What’s News. New York, NY: Free Press.\nGarrett, R. K., Nisbet, E. C., & Lynch, E. K. (2013). Undermining the corrective \n effects of media-based political fact checking? The role of contextual cues and \n naïve theory. Journal of Communication, 63(4), 617-637.\nGraves, L. (2016). Deciding what’s true: The rise of political fact-checking in\n American journalism. Columbia, DV: Columbia University Press.\nGuess, A., Nagler, J., & Tucker, J. (2019). Less than you think: Prevalence and predictors of\n fake news dissemination on Facebook. Science advances, 5(1), eaau4586.\nGunther, R., Beck, P. A., & Nisbet, E. C. (2018). Fake news did have a significant\n impact on the vote in the 2016 election: Original full-length version with\n methodological appendix. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University.\nHastorf, A. H., & Cantril, H. (1954). They saw a game; a case study. Journal of\n Abnormal and Social Psychology, 49(1), 129-134.\nHannak, A., Sapiezynski, P., Molavi Kakhki, A., Krishnamurthy, B., Lazer, D., Mislove, A.,\n and Wilson, C. (2013, May). Measuring personalization of web search. In\n Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on World Wide Web.\nHobbs, R. (1998). The seven great debates in the media literacy movement.\n Journal of Communication, 48(1), 16-32\nHolton, B., & Pyszczynski, T. (1989). Biased information search in the interpersonal\n domain. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15(1), 42-51.\nHoward, P. N., Kollanyi, B., Bradshaw, S., & Neudert, L. M. (2018). Social Media,\n News and Political Information during the US Election: Was Polarizing\n Content Concentrated in Swing States?. Oxford Internet Institute\n Oxford University.\nJost, J. T., Barberá, P., Bonneau, R., Langer, M., Metzger, M., Nagler, J., &\n Tucker, J. A. (2018). How social media facilitates political protest: \n Information, motivation, and social networks. Political psychology, 39, 85-\n 118.\nMacdonald, H. (2018). TRUTH: How the Many Sides to Every Story Shape Our\n Reality. London, England.\nInan, T., & Temur, T. (2012). Examining media literacy levels of prospective teachers.\n International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4, 269-285.\nJones-Jang, S. M., Mortensen, T., & Liu, J. (2019). Does Media Literacy Help Identification\n of Fake News? Information Literacy Helps, but Other Literacies Don’t. American\n Behavioral Scientist, 1-18.\nKahan, D. M. (2012). Ideology, motivated reasoning, and cognitive reflection: An\n experimental study. Judgment and Decision Making, 8(4), 407-424.\nKahan, D. M. (2017). Misconceptions, Misinformation, and the Logic of Identity-Protective\n Cognition. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2973067\nKahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan.\nLazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass\n Communications: a Report of the Bureau of Applied Social Research, Columbia \n University.\nKenan Malik. (2016, December 04). All the Fake News That Was Fit to Print. New\n York Times. Retrieved from: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/04/opinion/all- \n the-fake-news-that-was-fit-to- \n print.html?_ga=2.108495170.152870180.1535530297-\n 644505419.1533260946\nKunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, \n 108(3),480-498.\nLamb, B. (2018). False witnesses: Fact and fiction in the age of fake news. Screen \n Education, (91), 94-99.\nLewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K., Seifert, C. M., Schwarz, N., & Cook, J. (2012). \n Misinformation and its correction: Continued influence and successful\n debiasing. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13(3), 106-131.\nMalik, M., Cortesi, S., & Gasser, U. (2013). The challenges of defining “news literacy.\n Berkman Center for Internet & Society. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/\n papers.cfm?abstract_id=2342313\nManfra, M. M., & Holmes, C. (2018). Media Literacy and Fake News in the Social\n Studies. Social Education, 83(2), 91-95.\nMcGrew, S., Ortega, T., Breakstone, J., & Wineburg, S. (2017). The Challenge That`s \n Bigger than Fake News: Civic Reasoning in a Social Media Environment.\n American Educator, 41(3), 4.\nMele, N., Lazer, D., Baum, M., Grinberg, N., Friedland, L., Joseph, K., &\n Mattsson, C. (2017). Combating fake news: An agenda for research and\n action. Retrieved from http://shorensteincenter.org/combating-fake-news-\n agenda-for-research/.\nMercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative\n theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(2), 57-74.\nMocanu, D., Rossi, L., Zhang, Q., Karsai, M., & Quattrociocchi, W. (2015).\n Collective attention in the age of (mis) information. Computers in Human \n Behavior, 51, 1198-1204.\nMosseri Adam.(2016). Addressing Hoaxes and Fake News.\n Facebook Newsroom. Retrieved from \n https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2016/12/news-feed-fyi-addressing-hoaxes-and-\n fake-news/\nMuller, E. N. (1977). Mass politics: Focus on participation. American Behavioral\n Scientist, 21(1), 63-86.\nNewman, N., Fletcher, R., Kalogeropoulos, A., Levy, D. A., & Nielsen, R. K. (2018).\n Reuters Institute digital news report 2018. Retrieved from \n https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/digital-news-report- \n 2018.pdf.\nNickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises.\n Review of General Psychology, 2, 175-220.\nNorris, P., & Jones, D. (1998). Virtual democracy. Harvard International Journal of Press\n Politics, 3(1), 1–4.\nNyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When corrections fail: The persistence of political\n misperceptions. Political Behavior, 32(2), 303-330.\nPapacharissi, Z. (2010). A Private Sphere: Democracy in a Digital Age . Cambridge, UK:\n Polity\nPariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. Penguin UK.\nPavleska, T., Školkay, A., Zankova, B., Ribeiro, N., & Bechmann, A. (2018). \n Performance analysis of fact-checking organizations and initiatives in Europe:\n a critical overview of online platforms fighting fake news. Social media and\n convergence, 17, 1-29.\nPennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2017, July 8). The implied truth effect: Attaching\n warnings to a subset of fake news stories increases perceived accuracy of\n stories without warnings. Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved from\n https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3035384.\nPennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2019). Who falls for fake news? The roles of analytic\nthinking, motivated reasoning, political ideology, and bullshit receptivity. Journal of\n Personality, 1-16.\nPotter, W. J. (2010b). The state of media literacy. Journal of Broadcasting\n & Electronic Media, 54, 675-696.\nPrimack, B. A., Gold, M. A., Switzer, G. E., Hobbs, R., Land, S. R., & Fine, M. J. (2006).\n Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 160, 369-374.\nShin, J., & Thorson, K. (2017). Partisan selective sharing: The biased diffusion of\n Fact-checking messages on social media. Journal of Communication, 67(2), \n 233-255.\nSwire, B., & Ecker, U. K. H. (2018). Misinformation and its correction: Cognitive\n mechanisms and recommendations for mass communication. In\n Misinformation and mass audiences (pp.195-211). Austin, Texas: University\n of Texas Press.\nTandoc Jr, E. C., Lim, Z. W., & Ling, R. (2018). Defining “fake news” A typology of\n scholarly definitions. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 137-153.\nTandoc Jr, E. C., Ling, R., Westlund, O., Duffy, A., Goh, D., & Zheng Wei, L. (2018).\n Audiences’ acts of authentication in the age of fake news: A conceptual\n framework. New Media & Society, 20(8), 2745-2763.\nWood, T., & Porter, E. (2016). The elusive backfire effect: Mass attitudes’ steadfast\n factual adherence. Political Behavior, 1-29.\nLewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K., & Cook, J. (2017). Beyond misinformation:\n Understanding and coping with the “post-truth” era. Journal of applied \n research in memory and cognition, 6(4), 353-369.\nTarran, B. (2017). Why facts are not enough in the fight against fake news.\n Significance, 14(5), 6-7.\nV. Shah, Nojin Kwak, R. Lance Holbert, D. (2001). "Connecting" and" disconnecting" with\n civic life: Patterns of Internet use and the production of social capital. Political\n communication, 18(2), 141-162.\nVan Bavel, J. J., & Pereira, A. (2018). The partisan brain: An Identity-based model of\n political belief. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(3), 213-224.\nVerplanken, B. (1993). Need for cognition and external information search: Responses to\n time pressure during decision-making. Journal of Research in Personality, 27(3),\n 238-252.\nVizoso, Á., & Vázquez-Herrero, J. (2019). Fact-checking platforms in Spanish.\n Features, organisation and method. Communication & Society, 32(1), 127-\n 142.\nVosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news\n online. Science, 359(6380), 1146-1151.\nWardle (2017). Fake news. It`s complicated. First Draft. Retrieved from\n https://medium.com/1st-draft/fake-news-its-complicated-d0f773766c79\nWineburg, S., McGrew, S., Breakstone, J., & Ortega, T. (2016, January 8). Evaluating\n information: The cornerstone of civic online reasoning. Retrieved from\n Stanford Digital Repository, Web site:\n https://library.stanford.edu/research/stanford-digital-repository\n | 描述: | 碩士 國立政治大學 傳播學院傳播碩士學位學程 105464004 |
資料來源: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1054640041 | 資料類型: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | 學位論文 |
Files in This Item:
| File | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 004101.pdf | 2.52 MB | Adobe PDF2 | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.