News Consumption Habits of Digital Immigrants on Social Media and Strategies for Combating Fake News: The Case of Kyrgyzstan

Öz

This study focuses on the news reading and sharing practices of digital migrants in Kyrgyzstan on social media, as well as their methods for detecting fake news, and aims to emphasize the importance of media literacy. While the number of academic studies on fake news in Kyrgyzstan has recently increased, analyses of digital migrants remain insufficient. This increases the significance of this study and aims to contribute to the ever-evolving digital media literature. The study employs a mixed methodology involving quantitative and qualitative data. In this context, a closed-ended online survey was administered to 128 digital migrants living in Kyrgyzstan and born before 1995. Interviews were conducted with 12 participants representing digital migrants using the semi-structured interview technique, a qualitative research method. The quantitative data obtained were analyzed using the PSPP statistical program, while the qualitative data were analyzed using the MAXQDA qualitative data analysis program and thematic analysis. The research findings reveal that social media is the primary news source providing information access for digital migrants in Kyrgyzstan. However, this situation appears to present various problems regarding information security and accuracy. Despite participants' access to technological infrastructure, they were found to lack media literacy. Furthermore, while it's noteworthy that they developed verification methods based on their personal experiences, they were observed to lack sufficient knowledge of official verification platforms.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Digital Immigrants
• Social Media
• News Consumption
• Fake News
• Kyrgyzstan

Dijital Göçmenlerin Sosyal Medyada Haber Tüketim Alışkanlıkları ve Sahte Haberle Mücadele Stratejileri: Kırgızistan Örneği

Öz

Bu çalışma; Kırgızistan’daki dijital göçmenlerin sosyal medyada haber okuma, paylaşma pratiklerine ve sahte haberleri tespit etme yöntemlerine odaklanmakta, medya okuryazarlığının önemini vurgulamayı hedeflemektedir. Kırgızistan’da sahte haber konusunda yapılan akademik araştırmaların sayısı son dönemde artmakta, buna rağmen dijital göçmenlerle ilgili analizler henüz yetersiz kalmaktadır. Bu durum çalışmanın önemini artırmakta ve çalışma sürekli gelişen dijital medya literatürüne katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmada nicel ve nitel verilerin yer aldığı karma yöntem uygulanmıştır. Bu kapsamda araştırmada Kırgızistan’da yaşayan ve 1995 öncesi doğmuş 128 dijital göçmene kapalı-uçlu olarak hazırlanan ve çevrimiçi olarak dağıtılan anket soruları yöneltilmekte, nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden biri olan yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme tekniği kullanılarak dijital göçmenleri temsil eden 12 katılımcıyla görüşme gerçekleştirilmiştir. Elde edilen nicel veriler PSPP istatistik programıyla, nitel veriler ise MAXQDA nitel veri analiz programına aktarılarak tematik analiz yöntemi ile yorumlanmıştır. Araştırma bulguları sosyal medyanın Kırgızistan’daki dijital göçmenler açısından bilgiye erişim sağlayan temel haber kaynağı olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Ancak bu durumun bilgi güvenliği, doğruluk konusunda çeşitli sorunları da beraberinde getirdiği görülmektedir. Katılımcıların teknolojik alt yapıya erişiminin yüksek olmasına rağmen medya okuryazarlık bağlamında yetersiz kaldıkları tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca kişisel deneyimlerine dayalı olarak doğrulama yöntemlerini geliştirdikleri dikkat çekici olmakla birlikte katılımcıların resmi doğrulama platformlarıyla ilgili yeterince bilgi sahibi olmadıkları gözlemlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dijital Göçmenler
• Sosyal Medya
• Haber Tüketimi
• Sahte Haber
• Kırgızistan

Kaynakça

1. Abdou, D., and Jasimuddin, S. M. (2020). The use of the UTAUT model in the adoption of e- learning technologies An empirical study in France based banks. Journal of Global Information Management, 28(4), 38–51.
2. Al-Rawi, A., Inoyatova, T., Turdubaeva, E., and Papoutsaki, E. (2023). Mapping social media in Kyrgyzstan. In E. Turdubaeva and E. Papoutsaki (Eds), Mapping the media and communication landscape of Central Asia: An anthology of emerging and contemporary issues (p. 287). Lexington Books.
3. Allcott, H., and Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31 (2), 211-36.
4. Azattyk. (2025) Azattyk. (2025). Jalgan Jalaa , Mazaktoo üçün ayıp: Talaştuu Mıyzam kanday işteyt? https://www.azattyk.org/a/33309194.html adresinden 14.03.2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
5. Baki, A. ve Gökçek, T. (2012). Karma yöntem araştrrmalarına genel bir bakış. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 11 (42), 1-021.
6. Baptista, J. P., and Gradim, A. (2020). Understanding fake news consumption: a review. Social Sciences, 9(10), 185.
7. Benkler, Y., R. Faris, H. Roberts and Zuckerman, E. (2017). Study: Breitbart-led right-wing media ecosystem altered broader media agend. Columbia Journalism Review.
8. Berger, J., Milkman, KL. (2011). What makes online content viral? emotion and virality. Journal of Marketing Research Article Postprint 5,1-47.

9. Bergström and Belfrage (2018). News in social media: incidental consumption and the role of opinion leaders. Digital Journalism, 6 (5), 583-598.
10. Bodaghi, A. Schmitt, K.A., Watine, P., Fung, B.C.M. (2024). Literature review on detecting, verifying, and mitigating online misinformation. IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems, 1–27, 10.1109/TCSS.2023.3289031
11. Boğazliyanlioğlu, S. (2021). Hakikat ötesi çağında Türkiye’deki dijital göçmenle rin sahte haber farkındalığı. [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Marmara Üni̇versi̇tesi̇.
12. Cambridge. (2018). https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/ adresinden 14.03.2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
13. DataRepotal.(2025). Digital 2025: Global overview report, https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2025-global-overview-report, adresinden 14.03.2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
14. European Commission. (2018). A multi-dimensional approach to disinformation: report of the independent high level group on fake news and online disinformation. Luxembourg:Publications Office of the European Union.
15. Faverio, M. (2022). Share of those 65 and older who are tech users has grown in the past decade. Pew Research Center, https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/01/13/share-of-those-65-and-older-who-are-tech-users-has-grown-in-the-past-decade/ adresinden 14.03.2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
16. Fietkiewicz, K. (2017). Jumping the digital divide: how do “silver surfers” and “digital immigrants” use social media? ageing in a network society, 10(1).
17. Gaozhao, D. (2021). Flagging fake news on social media: an experimental study of media consumers’ identification of fake news. Government Information Quarterly 38(3).
18. Guess, A.; Nagler, J.; Tucker, J. (2019). Less than you think: prevalence and predictors of fake news dissemination on Facebook. Sci. Adv. 5, eaau4586.
19. GWİ.(2025). Adult social media usage stats, https://app.globalwebindex.com/spark/chat/47b74630-6b29-4ddf-b0d1-7980fd01f3ce adresinden 14.03.2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
20. Hakkarainen, K., Hietajärvi, L., Alho, K., Lonka, K., and Salmela-Aro, K. (2015). Sociodigital revolution: digital natives vs digital immigrants. In International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences, 918-923.
21. Jiang, L., vd. (2025). Analyzing the impact of social media on the formation of public opinion and trust in information in contemporary journalism in Kyrgyzstan. Review of Communication.
22. Jin et al., Z. Jin, J. Cao, Y. Zhang, J. Luo (2016). News verification by exploiting conflicting social viewpoints in microblogs AAAI. Proceeding AAAI'16 Proceedings of the Thirtieth AAAI. Conference on Artificial Intelligence Phoenix, Arizona.
23. Joshi A., Dencker J. C., Franz G., and Martocchio J. J. (2010). Unpacking generational identities in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 35(3), 392–414.
24. Kesharwani, A. (2020). Do (how) digital natives adopt a new technology differently than digital immigrants? a longitudinal study. Information & Management, 57 ( 2), 1-16.
25. Kim A, Dennis AR (2019). Says who? The effects of presentation format and source rating on fake news in social media. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems 43(3), 1025–1039.
26. Kim, J., Jeon, S.-W., Byun, H., and Yi, E. (2023). Exploring E-health literacy and technology-use anxiety among older adults in Korea. Healthcare, 11(11), 1556. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11111556
27. Kumar, Y. (2021). De-radicalizing the youth in Kyrgyzstan via social media and its implications for Central Asia. Central Asian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 7 (2), 21–8.
28. Kurambayev, B. (2020). Online activism in politically restricted Central Asia: A Comparative Review of Kazakh stan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan .In Handbook of Communication for Development and Social Change, 961–76.
29. Martin, A. (2005). DigEuLit–a European framework for digital literacy: a progress report. J. eLiteracy, 2(2), 130–136.
30. Marwick, A.E. (2018). Why do people share fake news? a sociotechnical model of media effects. Georget. Law Technol. Rev., 2, 474–512.
31. McGonagle T (2017). Fake news”: False fears or real concerns? Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights 35(4), 203–209.
32. Melchior, C. and Oliveira, M. (2024). A systematic literature review of the motivations to share fake news on social media platforms and how to fight them. New Media&Society 26(2),1127-1150.
33. Müller, A. P. R., Lerusse, A., Steen, T., and de Walle, S. V. (2021). Understanding channel choice in users’ reporting behavior: Evidence from a smart mobility case. Government Information Quarterly, 38(1), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101540
34. Pazarbaşi, B. (2020). Dijital Çağda “Habere İnanmıyorsunuz” Sahte Haber, Gazetecilik/ Ve Gerçek. S. Akgül ve B. Pazarbaşı (Ed.), Dijital(İn) Ritmi İletişim, Medya Ve Kültür Alanlarında Yeni Perspektifler. Hiperyayın, İstanbul.
35. Pennycook G, McPhetres J, Zhang Y, et al. (2020). Fighting COVID-19 misinformation on social media: Experimental evidence for a scalable accuracy-nudge intervention. Psychological Science, 31(7),770–780.
36. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon, 9 (5), 1-6.
37. Reuters (2024). Digital news report 2024, https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report/2024 adresinden14.03.2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
38. Rosen, L.D. (2010). Rewired: understanding the generation and the way they learn. St. Martin’s Press.
39. Rosenberg, H., and Feldman, C. S. (2008). No time to think; the menace of media speed and the 24-hour news cycle. The Continuum International Publishing Group.
40. Shinde, P. and Sathyaprakash M. (2023). Digital immigrants and digital deception: consuming and combating fake news online. ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts, 4(1), 34–47.
41. Shu, K., Sliva, A., Wang, S., Tang, J., and Liu, H. (2017). Fake news detection on social media: a data mining perspective. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, 19(1), 22-36. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1708.01967.
42. Silverman, C. (2016). This analysis shows how viral fake election news stories outperformed real news on Facebook . BuzzFeed.
43. Spohr, D. (2017). Fake news and ideological polarization: filter bubbles and selective exposure on social media. Business Information Review, 34(3), 150–160.
44. Sulianta, F., Sapriya., Supriatna, N., Disman., (2020). Digital content model of social study education in user generated content platform as a media literacy to educate students and cyber society. İnternational Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 10(8), 1084-1092.
45. Tandoc, E. C., Jr., Lim, Z. W., and Ling, R. (2018). Defining “fake news”: a typology of scholarly definitions. Digital Journalism, 6 (2), 137-153.
46. Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: the rise of the net generation. Educ. Inf. Technol. 4(2), 203-205.
47. Thangavel, P., and Chandra, B. (2024). Digital immigrants versus digital natives: decoding their e-commerce Adoption Behavior. SAGE Open.
48. Trninić D, Kuprešanin Vukelić A, Bokan J (2021). Perception of “fake news” and potentially manipulative content in digital media-a generational approach. Societies, 12(1), 3.
49. van Deursen, A. J. A. M., and van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2019). The first-level digital divide shifts from inequalities in physical access to inequalities in material access. New Media & Society, 21(2), 354–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818797082
50. Vaportzis, E., Clausen, M. G., and Gow, A. J. (2017). Older adults perceptions of technology and barriers to interacting with tablet computers: a focus group study. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(1), 1687–1697. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01687
51. Wardle, C. (2017). Fake News. It's Complicated. First Draft Coalition. https://medium.com/1st-draft/fake-news-its-complicated d0f773766c79#.y3yk2m41m. adresinden 15.04.2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
52. Wardle, C. (2019). Understanding information disorder. First Draft News
53. Wong, I.A., Huang, J., Lin, Z. and Jiao, H. (2022). Smart dining, smart restaurant, and smart service quality (SSQ). International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 34 (6), 2272-2297.