Sahte Haberlerin Siyasal Gündem ve Kutuplaşma Üzerindeki Rolü: X Üzerinden Duygu Analizine Dayalı Bir İnceleme

Öz

Post-truth (hakikat-sonrası) dönem, duyguların, inançların ve dezenformasyonun hakikati şekillendirdiği, siyasal gündemi etkilediği ve toplumsal kutuplaşmayı derinleştirdiği bir siyasal çerçeve üretmiştir. Bu bağlamda sosyal medya platformları, kullanıcıların siyasal aktörler olarak konumlandığı temel siyasal alanlar haline gelmiştir. Bu çalışma, sahte haberlerin siyasal etkilerini, 4 Mart 2024 tarihinde Trump destekçilerinin Afrika kökenli Amerikalı seçmenleri hedef alan bir dezenformasyon içeriğini yaydığı olaya odaklanan bir vaka analizi üzerinden incelemektedir. Duygu analizi yöntemi kullanılarak X (eski adıyla Twitter) kullanıcılarının sahte haberlere yönelik tutumları negatif, pozitif ve nötr olmak üzere üç kategori altında analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular, sahte haberlerin karşıt duygusal tepkileri pekiştirerek siyasal kutuplaşmayı artırdığını ve siyasal gündem üzerinde etkili olduğunu göstermektedir. Elde edilen sonuçlar, post-truth dönemin demokrasi üzerindeki meydan okumalarına ilişkin literatürle uyumludur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Post-truth dönem
• duygu
• dezenformasyon
• sahte haber
• duygu analizi

The Role of Fake News in Political Agenda and Polarization: Insights from Sentiment Analysis on X

Öz

The post-truth era has created a political framework where emotions, beliefs, and disinformation shape truth, influence political agendas, and polarize society. In this framework social media platforms serve as key political arenas, with users acting as political actors. This study examines the political impact of fake news through a case study involving a March 4, 2024 incident, where Trump supporters shared disinformation targeting African American voters. Using sentiment analysis, it analyzed X (formerly Twitter) users’ attitudes towards fake news in three categories: Negative, positive and neutral. Findings reveal that fake news fosters political polarization by reinforcing opposing emotional reactions and impacting the political agenda. The results align with literature on the post-truth era’s democratic challenges.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Post-truth era
• emotion
• disinformation
• fake news
• sentiment analysis

Kaynakça

1. Aljedaani, W., Rustam, F., Mkaouer, M. W., Ghallab, A., Rupapara, V., Washington, P. B., Lee, E., & Ashraf, I. (2022). Sentiment analysis on Twitter data integrating TextBlob and deep learning models: The case of US airline industry. Knowledge-Based Systems, 255, 109780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2022.109780
2. Anzera, G., & Massa, A. (2021). Using International Relations Theories to Understand Disinformation. In G. Lopez-Garcia, D. Palau-Sampio, B. Palomo, E. Campos-Dominguez, & P. Masip (Eds.), Politics of Disinformation: The Influence of Fake News on the Public Sphere (pp. 35–47). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
3. Bandi, A., & Fellah, A. (2019). Socio-Analyzer: A Sentiment Analysis Using Social Media Data. Proceedings of 28th International Conference on Software Engineering and Data Engineering, 61–53. https://doi.org/10.29007/kzk1
4. BBC. (2024). Trump supporters target black voters with faked AI images. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68440150
5. Bontcheva, K., & Posetti, J. (2020). Balancing act: countering digital disinformation while respecting freedom of expression: Broadband Commission research report on ‘Freedom of Expression and Addressing Disinformation on the Internet’’.’ International Telecommunication Union.
6. Bradshaw, S., Bailey, H., & Howard, P. N. (2021). Industrialized disinformation: 2020 global inventory of organized social media manipulation. Programme on Democracy & Technology. https://demtech.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2021/01/CyberTroop-Report-2020-v.2.pdf
7. Bradshaw, S., & Howard, P. N. (2019). The global disinformation order: 2019 global inventory of organised social media manipulation. Programme on Democracy & Technology. https://demtech.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2019/09/CyberTroop-Report19.pdf
8. Bufacchi, V. (2021). Truth, lies and tweets: A Consensus Theory of Post-Truth. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 47(3), 347–361. https://doi.org/10.1177/0191453719896382

9. Colomina, C., Sanchez-Margelef, H., & Youngs, R. (2021). The impact of disinformation on democratic processes and human rights in the world. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EXPO_STU(2021)653635
10. Çanakpınar, B., Kalelioğlu, M., & Günay, V. D. (2024). Semiotics and political discourse in the post-truth era. Language and Semiotic Studies, 10(1), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1515/lass-2023-0040
11. Dumitrache, A. C. (2019). Shades of fake news: Manifestation, effects and ways to combat false information. Romanian Journal of Communication and Public Relations, 21(2), 41–57. https://doi.org/10.21018/rjcpr.2019.2.276
12. Earle, S. (2017). Trolls, bots and fake news: The mysterious world of social media manipulation. Newsweek. https://www.newsweek.com/trolls-bots-and-fake-news-dark-and-mysterious-world-social-media-manipulation-682155
13. Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405284363
14. Galeotti, A. E. (2020). Political disinformation and voting behavior: Fake news and motivated reasoning. Notizie Di POLITEIA, 37(142), 64–85. https://iris.uniupo.it/retrieve/e163b890-4f70-c12c-e053-d805fe0a7f21/Politeia_142_Galeotti.pdf
15. Gerrits, A. W. M. (2018). Disinformation in international relations: How important is it? Security and Human Rights, 29(1–4), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1163/18750230-02901007
16. Grossmann, M., & Hopkins, D. A. (2016). Asymmetric politics: Ideological Republicans and group interest Democrats. Oxford University Press.
17. Ha, H., Han, H., Mun, S., Bae, S., Lee, J., & Lee, K. (2019). An improved study of multilevel semantic network visualization for analyzing sentiment word of movie review data. Applied Sciences, 9(12), 2419. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9122419
18. Haksever, O. U., & Sözen, A. (2024). The instrumentalization of post-truth politics in Turkey: The case of the 2023 elections. Turkish Studies, 25(3), 398–418. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2024.2322547
19. Heckler, N., & Ronquillo, J. C. (2019). Racist fake news in United States’ history: Lessons for public administration. Public Integrity, 21(5), 477–490. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2019.1626696
20. Honeycutt, N., & Jussim, L. (2023). Political Bias in the Social Sciences: A Critical, Theoretical, and Empirical Review. In C. L. Frisby, R. E. Redding, W. T. O’Donohue, & S. O. Lilienfeld (Eds.), Ideological and Political Bias in Psychology (pp. 97–146). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29148-7_5
21. Jardina, A. (2021). In-group love and out-group hate: White racial attitudes in contemporary U.S. elections. Political Behavior, 43(4), 1535–1559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-020-09600-x
22. Kelkar, S. (2019). Post-truth and the search for objectivity: Political polarization and the remaking of knowledge production. Engaging Science, Technology, and Society, 5, 86–106. https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2019.268
23. Kim, H., & Jeong, Y.-S. (2019). Sentiment classification using convolutional neural betworks. Applied Sciences, 9(11), 2347. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9112347
24. Kross, E., Verduyn, P., Boyer, M., Drake, B., Gainsburg, I., Vickers, B., Ybarra, O., & Jonides, J. (2019). Does counting emotion words on online social networks provide a window into people’s subjective experience of emotion? A case study on Facebook. Emotion, 19(1), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000416
25. Levy, N. (2017). The bad news about fake news. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 6(8), 20–36. https://social-epistemology.com/2017/07/24/the-bad-news-about-fake-news-neil-levy/
26. Ludwig, J., & Sommer, J. (2024). Mindsets and politically motivated reasoning about fake news. Motivation and Emotion, 48(3), 249–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-024-10067-0
27. Lynch, M. (2017). STS, symmetry and post-truth. Social Studies of Science, 47(4), 593–599. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312717720308
28. MacCarthaigh, M., & McKeown, C. (2021). A political science perspective on fake news. In T. Chakraborty, S. Kumar, C. Long, & D. Padmanabhan (Eds.), Data Science for Fake News: Surveys and Perspectives (pp. 233–243). Springer.
29. Martin-Rozumilowicz, B., & Kuzel, R. (2019). Social media, disinformation and electoral integrity. https://www.ifes.org/publications/social-media-disinformation-and-electoral-integrity
30. Mehta, P., & Pandya, S. (2020). A review on sentiment analysis methodologies, practices and applications. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 9(2), 601–609. https://www.ijstr.org/final-print/feb2020/A-Review-On-Sentiment-Analysis-Methodologies-Practices-And-Applications.pdf
31. Muldrow, A. F., & Shearman, S. M. (2024). How political identification and individual differences influence black lives matter message reactions. Howard Journal of Communications, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10646175.2024.2306823
32. Nguyen, C. G., Mayer, S. J., & Veit, S. (2022). The impact of emotions on polarization. Anger polarizes attitudes towards vaccine mandates and increases affective polarization. Research & Politics, 9(3), 205316802211165. https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680221116571
33. Oliver, M. (2020). Infrastructure and the post-truth era: is Trump Twitter’s fault? Postdigital Science and Education, 2(1), 17–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-019-00073-8
34. Oxford Language. (2016). Word of the year 2016. https://languages.oup.com/word-of-the-year/2016/
35. Pérez-Curiel, C., & Limón-Naharro, P. (2019). Political influencers. A study of Donald Trump’s personal brand on Twitter and its impact on the media and users. Communication & Society, 32(1), 57–75. https://doi.org/10.15581/003.32.1.57-75
36. Phillips, T. (2019). Bolsonaro business backers accused of illegal Whatsapp fake news campaign. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/18/brazil-jair-bolsonaro-whatsapp-fake-news-campaign
37. Poria, S., Hazarika, D., Majumder, N., & Mihalcea, R. (2023). Beneath the tip of the iceberg: Current challenges and new directions in sentiment analysis research. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing, 14(1), 108–132. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAFFC.2020.3038167
38. Prinz, J. (2021). Emotion and political polarization. In A. Falcato (Ed.), The Politics of Emotional Shockwaves (pp. 1–25). Palgrave Macmillan.
39. Samuelson, K. (2016). What to know about Pizzagate, the fake news story with real consequences. Time. https://time.com/4590255/pizzagate-fake-news-what-to-know/
40. Scherer, K. R. (2024). Emotion processes in social and political contexts: the case of affective polarisation. Cognition and Emotion, 38(4), 411–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2024.2361754
41. Settles, G. (2023). Don’t fall for these fake Donald Trump mug shots. He didn’t take one. Poynter. https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2023/donald-trump-mugshot-real-or-fake/
42. Shin, J., & Thorson, K. (2017). Partisan selective sharing: The biased diffusion of fact-checking messages on social media. Journal of Communication, 67(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12284
43. Silvermann, C. (2016). This analysis shows how viral fake election news stories outperformed real news on Facebook. BuzzFeed.News. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/viral-fake-election-news-outperformed-real-news-on-facebook
44. Sismondo, S. (2017). Post-truth? Social Studies of Science, 47(1), 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312717692076 Tandoc, E. C., Lim, Z. W., & Ling, R. (2018). Defining “fake news”: A typology of scholarly definitions. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 137–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1360143
45. Taş, H. (2018). The 15 July abortive coup and post-truth politics in Turkey. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 18(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2018.1452374
46. Timur Cakmak, E., & Oguzlar, A. (2022). Sentiment analysis on social media: The 5G perception during COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Social Inquiry, 15(1), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.37093/ijsi.928685
47. Vasu, N., Ang, B., Terri-Anne, T., Jayakumar, S., Faizal, M., & Ahuja, J. (2018). Fake news: National security in the post-truth era. https://www.rsis.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/PR180313_Fake-News_WEB.pdf
48. Viebeck, E. (2018). “Truth isn’t truth”: Giuliani weighs risks of possible Trump interview in Russia probe. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/truth-isnt-truth-giuliani-weighs-risks-of-possible-trump-interview-in-russia-probe/2018/08/19/61c11916-a3ca-11e8-a656-943eefab5daf_story.html
49. von Scheve, C. (2024). Putting emotions into affective polarisation. Cognition and Emotion, 38(4), 437–441. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2024.2346752
50. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559
51. Wright, C., Gatlin, K., Acosta, D., & Taylor, C. (2023). Portrayals of the black lives matter movement in hard and fake news and consumer attitudes toward African Americans. Howard Journal of Communications, 34(1), 19–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/10646175.2022.2065458