Difference between revisions of "Chaves-Braga2019"
ElliottHoey (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Mônica Chaves; Adriana Braga |Title=The agenda of disinformation: "fake news" and membership categorization analysis in the 2018 Brazil...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
|Author(s)=Mônica Chaves; Adriana Braga | |Author(s)=Mônica Chaves; Adriana Braga | ||
| − | |Title=The agenda of disinformation: | + | |Title=The agenda of disinformation: “fake news” and membership categorization analysis in the 2018 Brazilian presidential elections |
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Membership categorization analysis; Brazil; Elections; Political communication; Fake news; Politics; Mass media | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Membership categorization analysis; Brazil; Elections; Political communication; Fake news; Politics; Mass media | ||
|Key=Chaves-Braga2019 | |Key=Chaves-Braga2019 | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
|Volume=15 | |Volume=15 | ||
|Number=3 | |Number=3 | ||
| + | |Pages=474–495 | ||
|URL=https://bjr.sbpjor.org.br/bjr/article/view/1187 | |URL=https://bjr.sbpjor.org.br/bjr/article/view/1187 | ||
| − | |DOI= | + | |DOI=10.25200/BJR.v15n3.2019.1187 |
|Abstract=One of the main aspects of public debate in Brazil in the period that preceded the 2018 presidential elections was the dissemination of false stories via social media and messaging apps. Disinformation, misinformation, and mal-information – phenomena that comprehend elements such as wrongful, out of context, distorted and fabricated information, among others – were a major concern in the election, highlighted by the number of false stories debunked by independent fact-checkers. In the 20-day period between the two rounds of the presidential election, six fact-checking websites posted 228 verifications of false stories disseminated on social media and/or messaging apps, covering a range of about 132 different topics. This article aims to analyze the categorizations enunciated in their discourses. In order to do so, the methodological perspective utilized was the Membership Categorization Analysis, affiliated with the tradition of Ethnomethodology. | |Abstract=One of the main aspects of public debate in Brazil in the period that preceded the 2018 presidential elections was the dissemination of false stories via social media and messaging apps. Disinformation, misinformation, and mal-information – phenomena that comprehend elements such as wrongful, out of context, distorted and fabricated information, among others – were a major concern in the election, highlighted by the number of false stories debunked by independent fact-checkers. In the 20-day period between the two rounds of the presidential election, six fact-checking websites posted 228 verifications of false stories disseminated on social media and/or messaging apps, covering a range of about 132 different topics. This article aims to analyze the categorizations enunciated in their discourses. In order to do so, the methodological perspective utilized was the Membership Categorization Analysis, affiliated with the tradition of Ethnomethodology. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 02:53, 19 January 2020
| Chaves-Braga2019 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Chaves-Braga2019 |
| Author(s) | Mônica Chaves, Adriana Braga |
| Title | The agenda of disinformation: “fake news” and membership categorization analysis in the 2018 Brazilian presidential elections |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Membership categorization analysis, Brazil, Elections, Political communication, Fake news, Politics, Mass media |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2019 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Brazilian Journalism Research |
| Volume | 15 |
| Number | 3 |
| Pages | 474–495 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.25200/BJR.v15n3.2019.1187 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
One of the main aspects of public debate in Brazil in the period that preceded the 2018 presidential elections was the dissemination of false stories via social media and messaging apps. Disinformation, misinformation, and mal-information – phenomena that comprehend elements such as wrongful, out of context, distorted and fabricated information, among others – were a major concern in the election, highlighted by the number of false stories debunked by independent fact-checkers. In the 20-day period between the two rounds of the presidential election, six fact-checking websites posted 228 verifications of false stories disseminated on social media and/or messaging apps, covering a range of about 132 different topics. This article aims to analyze the categorizations enunciated in their discourses. In order to do so, the methodological perspective utilized was the Membership Categorization Analysis, affiliated with the tradition of Ethnomethodology.
Notes
