Hakikat-Ötesi Dönemde Medyaya Güven: Uluslararası Raporlar Üzerinden Bir İnceleme

Abstract

Hakikat-ötesi olarak adlandırılan dönemde, objektif gerçekliğin yerini git gide sahte haberlerin, kişisel duygu ve kanaatlerin almaya başladığı iddia edilmektedir. Sosyal medyanın yalan ve sahte bilgilerin yayılmasını kolaylaştırması da, kişilerin genel olarak medyaya duydukları güven konusunu tekrar tartışmalı hale getirmiştir. Bu çerçevede çalışmanın amacı, “Reuters Enstitüsü”, “Edelman Güven Ölçeği” ve “IPSOS” gibi uluslararası kuruluşların medyaya güvenle ilgili 2019 yılına ait güncel raporlarını inceleyerek, kişilerin geleneksel medya ve sosyal medyaya ne ölçüde güvendikleri ile bu güveni etkileyen faktörlerle ilgili küresel manzarayı ortaya koyup tartışmaya açmaktır. Çalışma neticesinde, geleneksel medyaya duyulan güvenin sosyal medyaya duyulan güvene göre çok daha yüksek seviyede olduğu görülmüştür. Ayrıca, ülkelerdeki politik kutuplaşma ve buna bağlı olarak artan sahte haber sorununun medyaya duyulan güveni olumsuz olarak etkilediği tespit edilmiştir.

Keywords

• Hakikat-ötesi
• Sosyal Medya
• Geleneksel Medya
• Sahte Haber
• Medya ve Güven
• Yankı Fanusları.

Media Trust in the Post-Truth Era: An Examination Through International Reports

Abstract

It is claimed that in the so-called post-truth era, fake news, personal beliefs and emotions began to take the place of objective reality. The fact that social media facilitated the spread of false information has made the issue of media trust disputable again. In this context, the aim of the study is to review the current (2019) reports of international organizations such as “Reuters Institute”, “Edelman Trust Barometer” and “IPSOS” regarding the media trust and reveal to what extent people trust traditional and social media and the factors affecting this trust. By doing so, it would be possible to present global scene regarding media trust. As a result of the study, it was seen that the trust in traditional media is much higher than the trust in social media. In addition, the political polarization and fake news problem which some countries experience have a negative effect on the media trust.

Keywords

• Post-truth
• Social Media
• Traditional Media
• Fake News
• Media and Trust
• Eco-chambers.

References

1. Allcott, H., ve Gentzkow, M., (2017). “Social media and fake news in the 2016 election.” Journal of economic perspectives, 31(2), s. 211-236.
2. Badawy, A., Ferrara, E., ve Lerman, K., (2018). “Analyzing the digital traces of political manipulation: the 2016 Russian interference Twitter campaign.” IEEE/ ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM) s. 258-265
3. Bakir, V., ve McStay, A., (2018). “Fake news and the economy of emotions: Problems, causes, solutions.” Digital journalism, 6(2), s. 154-175.
4. Baron, Ilan Zvi. (2018). How to save politics in a post-truth era: Thinking through difficult times. UK: Manchester University Press.
5. Berghel, Hal. (2017). “Lies, damn lies, and fake news.” Computer, 50(2), 80-85.
6. Bradshaw, S., ve Howard, P., (2017). “Troops, trolls and troublemakers: A global inventory of organized social media manipulation.” https://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/ sites/89/2017/07/Troops-Trolls-and-Troublemakers.pdf Erişim Tarihi: 20.07.2019.
7. CIGI-Ipsos. (2019). “2019 CIGI-Ipsos Global Survey on Internet Security and Trust.” www.cigionline.org/internet-survey-2019. Erişim Tarihi: 20.07.2019.
8. Davies, William. (2016). “The age of post-truth politics.” The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/24/opinion/campaign-stops/the-age-of-post-truth-politics.html Erişim Tarihi: 25.07.2019.

9. Edelman. (2019). “Edelman Trust Barometer: Global Report.” https://www.edelman.com/sites/g/files/aatuss191/files/2019-03/2019_Edelman_Trust_Barometer_Global_Report.pdf?utm_ source=website&utm_medium=global_report&utm_campaign=downloads Erişim Tarihi:01.05.2019
10. Flaxman, S., Goel, S., ve Rao, J. M., (2016). “Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption.” Public opinion quarterly, 80(S1), s. 298-320.
11. Flintham, M., Karner, C., Bachour, K., Creswick, H., Gupta, N., ve Moran, S. (2018).“Falling for fake news: investigating the consumption of news via social media.” In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems s. 376.
12. Hannak, A., Sapiezynski, P., Molavi Kakhki, A., Krishnamurthy, B., Lazer, D., Mislove, A., ve Wilson, C. (2013). “Measuring Personalization of Web Search.” Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web, International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee. S. 527–538.
13. Kakutani, Michiko (2018). The death of truth: Notes on falsehood in the age of Trump. Tim Duggan Books.
14. Keyes, Ralph (2004). The post-truth era: Dishonesty and deception in contemporary life. UK: Macmillan.
15. Khaldarova, I., ve Pantti, M., (2016). “Fake News” Journalism Practice, 10:7, 891-901.
16. Lewis, Seth C. (2012). “The tension between professional control and open participation.” Information, Communication & Society, 15(6), s. 836–866.McIntyre, Lee. (2018). Post-truth. MIT Press.
17. Meraz, S., ve Papacharissi, Z., (2012). “Networked gatekeeping and networked framing on #Egypt.” The International Journal of Press/Politics, 18(2), s. 138–166.
18. Mihailidis, P., ve Viotty, S., (2017). “Spreadable spectacle in digital culture: Civic expression, fake news, and the role of media literacies in “post-fact” society.” American Behavioral Scientist, 61(4), s. 441-454.
19. Munson, Sean A., ve Resnick, P., (2010). “Presenting Diverse Political Opinions: How and How Much.” Proceedings of the Sigchi Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, s. 1457–1466.
20. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Kalogeropoulos, A., ve Nielsen, R.K. (2019). “Reuters Institute Digital News Report. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.” https://reutersinstitute. politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2019-06/DNR_2019_FINAL_0.pdf Erişim Tarihi 16.06.2019
21. Pariser, Eli. (2011). The Filter Bubble: What the Internet is Hiding from You. London: Penguin UK.
22. Persily, Nathaniel (2017). “The 2016 US Election: Can democracy survive the internet?” Journal of democracy, 28(2), s. 63-76.
23. Prier, Jarred. (2017). “Commanding the Trend: Social Media as Information Warfare.” Strategic Studies Quarterly, 11(4) s. 50-85.
24. Schkade, D., Sunstein, C.R., ve Hastie, R., (2007). “What Happened on Deliberation Day?” California Law Review, 95, s. 915–940.
25. Schultz, Julianne (1998). Reviving the fourth estate: Democracy, accountability and the media. UK: Cambridge University Press.
26. Silverman, Craig (2016). “This Analysis Shows How Viral Fake Election News Stories Outperformed Real News On Facebook” https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/viralfake-election-news-outperformed-real-news-on-facebook Erişim Tarihi 16.06.2019
27. Sunstein, Cass R. (2009). Republic.com 2.0., NJ: Princeton University Press.
28. Tesich, Steve (1992). “A government of lies”. Nation, 254(1), s. 12-14.
29. Tucker, J. A., Guess, A., Barberá, P., Vaccari, C., Siegel, A., Sanovich, S., Stukal, D., ve Nyhan, B. (2018). “Social media, political polarization, and political disinformation: A review of the scientific literature.” https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/87402/1/Social-Media-Political-Polarizationand-Political-Disinformation-Literature-Review.pdf Erişim Tarihi 16.06.2019
30. Turcotte, J., York, C., Irving, J., Scholl, R. M., ve Pingree, R. J., (2015). “News recommendations from social media opinion leaders: Effects on media trust and information seeking.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(5), s. 520-535.
31. Verma, N., Fleischmann, K. R., ve Koltai, K. S. (2017). “Human values and trust in scientific journals, the mainstream media and fake news.” Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 54(1), 426-435.
32. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., ve Aral, S. (2018). “The spread of true and false news online.” Science, 359(6380), s. 1146-1151.