The Expanding Repertoire of Public Diplomacy: Media Literacy and Fact-Checking Platforms

Abstract

As digital communication networks increase the spread of disinformation, states, international organizations, non-governmental organizations and other pressure groups have started to fight against the problem of fake news. In addition to that, the deliberate spread of false information has become a tool for the “information war” between states. In this study, fact-checking platforms and associated media literacy initiatives are discussed in the context of the expanding repertoire of public diplomacy with digitalization and communication strategies applied to counteract disinformation. In this framework, the main focus is on the information struggle between Russia and the European Union and thus, the activities of the fact-checking platforms named EUvsDisinfo and StopFake have been analyzed within the context of the public diplomacy. As a result of the study, it is concluded that the fact-checking platforms used as the digital tool of public diplomacy have gone beyond the objective of “seeking the truth” and become part of the information struggle between the Western countries and Russia.

Keywords

• Disinformation,Fact-Checking,Public Diplomacy,Media Literacy,Social Networks

Kamu Diplomasisinin Genişleyen Repertuarı: Medya Okuryazarlığı ve Doğruluk Kontrol Platformları

Abstract

Dijital iletişim ağları dezenformasyonun yayılma hızını arttırmakta; devletler, uluslararası örgütler, sivil toplum örgütleri ve diğer baskı grupları ise ortaya çıkan sahte haber sorununa karşı mücadele etmektedir. Bunun yanında, yanlış bilgilerin kasıtlı olarak dolaşıma sokulması, devletler arasındaki “enformasyon savaşı”nın bir parçası olarak da görülmektedir. Çalışmada, doğruluk kontrol platformları ve buna bağlı medya okuryazarlığı inisiyatifleri, kamu diplomasisinin dijitalleşmeyle beraber genişleyen repertuarı ve dezenformasyona karşı koymada uygulanan iletişim stratejileri bağlamında ele alınmıştır. Bu kapsamda Rusya ile Avrupa Birliği arasındaki enformasyon mücadelesi odağa alınmış, EUvsDisinfo ve StopFake isimli doğruluk platformlarının faaliyetleri kamu diplomasisi teorik çerçevesiyle analiz edilmiştir. Çalışma sonucunda, kamu diplomasisinin dijital aracı olarak kullanılan doğruluk kontrol platformlarının “doğruyu arama” amacının ötesine geçerek, Batılı ülkeler ile Rusya arasındaki enformasyon mücadelesinin bir parçası haline geldikleri ortaya koyulmuştur.

Keywords

• Dezenformasyon,Doğruluk Kontrolü,Kamu Diplomasisi,Medya Okuryazarlığı,Sosyal Ağlar

References

1. AB Dış İlişkiler Servisi. (2019). Questions and Answers about the East StratCom Task Force. 12 Aralık 2019 tarihinde https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage/2116/-questions-and-answers-about-the-east-stratcom-task-force_en adresinden erişilmiştir.
2. Allcott, H., ve M. Gentzkow. (2017). Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election. Journal of Economic Perspectives 31 (2), 211 – 236.
3. Amazeen, M. A., Thorson, E., Muddiman, A., ve Graves, L. (2018). Correcting Political and Consumer Misperceptions: The Effectiveness and Effects of Rating Scale Versus Contextual Correction Formats. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(1), 28 – 48.
4. Avrupa Konseyi. (2019). Securing free and fair European elections: Council adopts conclusions. 15 Aralık 2019 tarihinde https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2019/02/19/securing-free-and-fair-european-elections-council-adopts-conclusions/ adresinden erişilmiştir.
5. Bennett, W. L., ve Livingston, S. (2018). The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European journal of communication, 33(2), 122 - 139.
6. Brady, A. M. (2015). Authoritarianism goes global (II): China’s foreign propaganda machine. Journal of Democracy 26(4), 51 – 59.
7. Brandtzaeg, P. B., ve Følstad, A. (2017). Trust and distrust in online fact-checking services. Communications of the ACM, 60(9), 65 - 71.
8. Cull, N. J. (2009). Public diplomacy: Lessons from the past. Los Angeles, CA: Figueroa Press.

9. Cull, N. J. (2016). Engaging foreign publics in the age of Trump and Putin: Three implications of 2016 for public diplomacy. Place Brand Public Diplomacy, 12, 243 – 246.
10. Cull, N. J. (2019). The Tightrope to Tomorrow: Reputational Security, Collective Vision and the Future of Public Diplomacy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 14(1-2), 21 - 35.
11. EUvsDisinfo. (2019). 24 Aralık 2019 tarihinde https://euvsdisinfo.eu/ adresinden erişilmiştir.
12. European Commission. (2016) Joint framework on countering hybrid threats, 24 Aralık 2019 tarihinde http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52016JC0018 adresinden erişilmiştir.
13. Fotyga, A. E. (2016). Report on EU Strategic Communication to Counteract Propaganda against It by Third Parties. Committee on Foreign Affairs, 1–22., 12 Aralık 2019 tarihinde http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2016-0290_EN.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
14. Fried, D., ve Polyakova, A. (2018). Democratic defense against disinformation. Washington, DC: Atlantic Council. 14 Aralık 2019 tarihinde https://disinfoportal.org/wp-content/uploads/ReportPDF/Democratic-Defense-Against-Disinformation.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
15. Garrett, R. K., Nisbet, E. C., ve Lynch, E. K. (2013). Undermining the corrective effects of media-based political fact checking? The role of contextual cues and naïve theory. Journal of Communication, 63, 617 - 637.
16. Giorio, L. (2018). War on Propaganda or PRopaganda War?: A case study of fact-checking and (counter) propaganda in the EEAS project EUvsDisinfo. 10 Kasım 2019 tarihinde http://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1252061&dswid=-592 adresinden erişilmiştir.
17. Graves, L., ve Cherubini, F. (2016). The Rise of Fact-Checking Sites in Europe. Oxford, UK: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
18. Graves, L. (2017). Anatomy of a fact check: Objective practice and the contested epistemology of fact checking. Communication, Culture & Critique, 10(3), 518 - 537.
19. Henley, J. (2020). How Finland starts its fight against fake news in primary schools. The Guardian. 29 Ocak 2020 tarihinde https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/28/fact-from-fiction-finlands-new-lessons-in-combating-fake-news adresinden erişilmiştir.
20. Howard, P. N., B. Ganesh, D. Liotsiou, J. Kelly, ve C. François. (2018). The IRA, Social Media and Political Polarization in the United States 2012–2018. 24 Aralık 2019 tarihinde https://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/93/2018/12/The-IRA-Social-Media-and-Political-Polarization.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
21. Humprecht, E. (2019). How Do They Debunk “Fake News”? A Cross-National Comparison of Transparency in Fact Checks, Digital Journalism, DOI: 10.1080/21670811.2019.1691031
22. Humprecht, E., Esser, F., ve Van Aelst, P. (2020). Resilience to Online Disinformation: A Framework for Cross-National Comparative Research. The International Journal of Press/Politics, DOI: 1940161219900126.
23. Jamieson, K. H. (2018). Cyberwar: how Russian hackers and trolls helped elect a president: what we don't, can't, and do know. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24. Juhász, A., ve Szicherle, P. (2017). The political effects of migration-related fake news, disinformation and conspiracy theories in Europe. Budapest: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Political Capital.
25. Kania, E. B., ve J. K. Costello. (2018(. The strategic support force and the future of chinese information operations. The Cyber Defense Review 3 (1), 105 – 122.
26. Khaldarova, I., ve Pantti, M. (2016). Fake news: The narrative battle over the Ukrainian conflict. Journalism Practice, 10(7), 891 - 901.
27. Kragh, M., ve Åsberg, S. (2017). Russia’s Strategy for Influence through Public Diplomacy and Active Measures: the Swedish Case. Journal of Strategic Studies, 40(6), 773 – 816.
28. Kuklinski, J. H., P. J. Quirk, J. Jerit, D. Schwieder, F. Robert, ve R. F. Rich. (2014). Misinformation and the Currency of Democratic Citizenship Misinformation and the Currency of Democratic Citizenship, The Journal of Politics, 62(3), 790 – 816.
29. La Cour, C. (2020). Theorising digital disinformation in international relations, International Politics, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-020-00215-x
30. Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K., Seifert, C. M., Schwarz, N., ve Cook, J. (2012). Misinformation and its correction: Continued influence and successful debiasing. Psychological science in the public interest, 13(3), 106 - 131.
31. Lupion, M. (2018). The gray war of our time: Information warfare and the kremlin’s weaponization of Russian-language digital news. The Journal of Slavic Military Studies 31 (3), 329 – 353.
32. Makhashvili, L. (2017). The Russian information war and propaganda narratives in the European Union and the EU’s Eastern Partnership countries. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 7(5), 309 - 313.
33. Mejias, U. A., ve Vokuev, N. E. (2017). Disinformation and the media: the case of Russia and Ukraine. Media, Culture & Society, 39(7), 1027 - 1042.
34. Narayanan, V., Howard, P. N., Kollanyi, B., ve Elswah, M. (2017). Russian involvement and junk news during Brexit. Computational Propaganda Project, Data Memo. 22 Aralık 2019 tarihinde http://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/89/2017/12/Russia-and-Brexit-v27.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
35. Nisbet, E. C., ve Kamenchuk, O. (2019). The Psychology of State-Sponsored Disinformation Campaigns and Implications for Public Diplomacy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 14(1-2), 65 - 82.
36. Nye, J. S. (2008), Public diplomacy and soft power. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 94 - 109.
37. Nye, J. S. (2010). The new public diplomacy, project syndicate. 12 Aralık 2019 tarihinde https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/the-new-public-diplomacy?barrier=accesspaylog adresinden erişilmiştir.
38. Oates, S. (2014). Russian State Narrative in the Digital Age: Rewired Propaganda in Russian Television News Framing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. Political Communication Pre-Conference at George Washington University, Washington, DC. 12 Aralık 2019 tarihinde http://www.media-politics.com/presentationspublications.htm adresinden erişilmiştir.
39. Oxford Sözlüğü (2019). 10 Aralık 2019 tarihinde https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/disinformation adresinden erişilmiştir.
40. Pavleska, T., Školkay, A., Zankova, B., Ribeiro, N., ve Bechmann, A. (2018). Performance analysis of fact-checking organizations and initiatives in Europe: A critical overview of online platforms fighting fake news. Social media and convergence, 1 - 29.
41. Renz, B. ve Smith, H. (2016). Russia and Hybrid Warfare – Going Beyond the Label, Aleksanteri Papers, 1 - 19.
42. Richey, M. (2018). Contemporary Russian revisionism: understanding the Kremlin’s hybrid warfare and the strategic and tactical deployment of disinformation. Asia Europe Journal, 16, 101 – 113.
43. Snegovaya, M. (2015). Putin’s information warfare in Ukraine. Soviet Origins of Russia’s Hybrid Warfare’, Russia Report, 1, 133 - 135.
44. Steenman, J. (2019). To what extent is societal (de) securitization present in the practices of EuVsDisinfo in the Netherlands and the EU?
45. StopFake.org. (2019). 24 Aralık 2019 tarihinde https://www.stopfake.org/en/about-us/ adresinden erişilmiştir.
46. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., ve Aral, S. (2018). The Spread of True and False News Online. Science 359, 1146 – 1151.
47. Young, D. G., Jamieson, K. H., Poulsen, S., ve Goldring, A. (2018). Fact-checking effectiveness as a function of format and tone: Evaluating FactCheck. org and FlackCheck. org. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(1), 49 - 75.