Wikipedia and fact-checking

Last updated

Wikipedia's volunteer editor community has the responsibility of fact-checking Wikipedia's content. [1] Their aim is to curb the dissemination of misinformation and disinformation by the website.

Contents

Wikipedia is considered one of the major free open source websites, where millions can read, edit and post their views for free. Therefore Wikipedia takes the effort to provide its readers with well-verified sources. Meticulous fact-checking is an aspect of the broader reliability of Wikipedia.

Various academic studies about Wikipedia and the body of criticism of Wikipedia seek to describe the limits of Wikipedia's reliability, document who uses Wikipedia for fact-checking and how, and what consequences result from this use. Wikipedia articles can have poor quality in many ways including self-contradictions. [2] Those poor articles require improvement.

Large platforms including YouTube [3] and Facebook [4] use Wikipedia's content to confirm the accuracy of the information in their own media collections.

Using Wikipedia for fact-checking

Wikipedia serves as a public resource for access to genuine information. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic was an important topic on which people relied on Wikipedia for genuine information. [5] Seeking public trust is a major part of Wikipedia's publication philosophy. [6] Various reader polls and studies have reported public trust in Wikipedia's process for quality control. [6] [7] In general, the public uses Wikipedia to counter fake news. [8]

YouTube fact-checking

YouTube using Wikipedia for fact-checking YouTube screenshot demonstrating Wikipedia fact-checking.png
YouTube using Wikipedia for fact-checking

At the 2018 South by Southwest conference, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki made the announcement that YouTube was using Wikipedia to fact check videos which YouTube hosts. [3] [9] [10] [11] No one at YouTube had consulted anyone at Wikipedia about this development, and the news at the time was a surprise. [9] The intent at the time was for YouTube to use Wikipedia as a counter to the spread of conspiracy theories. [9] This is done by adding new information boxes under some YouTube videos, thereby, attracting conspiracy theorists.[ citation needed ]

Facebook fact-checking

Facebook uses Wikipedia in various ways. Following criticism of Facebook in the context of fake news around the 2016 United States presidential election, Facebook recognized that Wikipedia already had an established process for fact-checking. [4] Facebook's subsequent strategy for countering fake news included using content from Wikipedia for fact-checking. [4] [12] In 2020, Facebook began to include information from Wikipedia's info boxes in its own general reference knowledge panels to provide objective information. [13]

Professional fact-checkers

Mike Caulfield and Sam Wineburg adapt an approach to fact checking as a type of media literacy, suggesting that information seekers emphasize lateral reading (or skimming multiple reliable sources instead of thoroughly examining one), including by using Wikipedia as a starting point for learning about a topic. [14]

Renée DiResta in her 2024 book advised victims of rumors, misinformation or disinformation to ensure that factual information was available online, including on Wikipedia, especially in an era when AI chatbots often rely on Wikipedia for information. [15]

Fact-checking Wikipedia

Fact-checking is one aspect of the general editing process in Wikipedia. The volunteer community develops a process for reference and fact-checking through community groups such as WikiProject Reliability. [8] Wikipedia has a reputation for cultivating a culture of fact-checking among its editors. [16] Wikipedia's fact-checking process depends on the activity of its volunteer community of contributors, who numbered 200,000 as of 2018. [1]

The development of fact-checking practices is ongoing in the Wikipedia editing community. [6] One development that took years was the 2017 community decision to declare a particular news source, Daily Mail , as generally unreliable as a citation for verifying claims. [6] [17] Through strict guidelines on verifiability, Wikipedia has been combating misinformation. [18] [ failed verification ] According to Wikipedia guidelines, all articles on Wikipedia's "mainspace" must be verifiable. [18]

Self-contradiction articles

A self-contradiction article is an article that contradicts itself. [a]

An experiment was conducted on detecting self-contradiction articles on Wikipedia using a developed model called "Pairwise Contradiction Neural Network" (PCNN). [19]

Limitations

When Wikipedia experiences vandalism, platforms that reuse Wikipedia's content may republish that vandalized content. [20] In 2016, journalists described how vandalism in Wikipedia undermines its use as a credible source. [21]

Vandalism is prohibited by Wikipedia. The website suggests these steps for inexperienced beginners to handle vandalism: access, revert, warn, watch, and finally report. [22]

In 2018, Facebook and YouTube were major users of Wikipedia for its fact-checking functions, but those commercial platforms were not contributing to Wikipedia's free nonprofit operations in any way. [20]

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ A self-contradiction article contains at least one pair of two statements that contradict each other and are both presented as truth.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">English Wikipedia</span> English-language edition of Wikipedia

The English Wikipedia is the primary English-language edition of Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia. It was created by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger on 15 January 2001, as Wikipedia's first edition.

Fact-checking is the process of verifying the factual accuracy of questioned reporting and statements. Fact-checking can be conducted before or after the text or content is published or otherwise disseminated. Internal fact-checking is such checking done in-house by the publisher to prevent inaccurate content from being published; when the text is analyzed by a third party, the process is called external fact-checking.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Misinformation</span> Incorrect or misleading information

Misinformation is incorrect or misleading information. Misinformation and disinformation are not interchangeable terms: Misinformation can exist with or without specific malicious intent whereas disinformation is distinct in that the information is deliberately deceptive and propagated. Misinformation can include inaccurate, incomplete, misleading, or false information as well as selective or half-truths. In January 2024, the World Economic Forum identified misinformation and disinformation, propagated by both internal and external interests, to "widen societal and political divides" as the most severe global risks within the next two years.

The Poynter Institute for Media Studies is a non-profit journalism school and research organization in St. Petersburg, Florida, United States. The school is the owner of the Tampa Bay Times newspaper and the International Fact-Checking Network. It also operates PolitiFact.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reliability of Wikipedia</span>

The reliability of Wikipedia and its user-generated editing model, particularly its English-language edition, has been questioned and tested. Wikipedia is written and edited by volunteer editors, who generate online content with the editorial oversight of other volunteer editors via community-generated policies and guidelines. The reliability of the project has been tested statistically through comparative review, analysis of the historical patterns, and strengths and weaknesses inherent in its editing process. The online encyclopedia has been criticized for its factual unreliability, principally regarding its content, presentation, and editorial processes. Studies and surveys attempting to gauge the reliability of Wikipedia have mixed results. Wikipedia's reliability was frequently criticized in the 2000s but has been improved; its English-language edition has been generally praised in the late 2010s and early 2020s.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Africa Check</span>

Africa Check is a non-profit fact checking organisation set up in 2012 to promote accuracy in public debate and the media in Africa. The organisation's goal is to raise the quality of information available to society across the continent. Africa Check is an independent organisation with offices in Johannesburg, Nairobi, Lagos, Dakar and London, producing reports in English and French testing claims made by public figures, institutions and the media against the best available evidence.

Fake news websites are websites on the Internet that deliberately publish fake news—hoaxes, propaganda, and disinformation purporting to be real news—often using social media to drive web traffic and amplify their effect. Unlike news satire, these websites deliberately seek to be perceived as legitimate and taken at face value, often for financial or political gain. Fake news websites monetize their content by exploiting the vulnerabilities of programmatic ad trading, which is a type of online advertising in which ads are traded through machine-to-machine auction in a real-time bidding system.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fake news</span> False or misleading information presented as real

Fake news or information disorder is false or misleading information claiming the aesthetics and legitimacy of news. Fake news often has the aim of damaging the reputation of a person or entity, or making money through advertising revenue. Although false news has always been spread throughout history, the term fake news was first used in the 1890s when sensational reports in newspapers were common. Nevertheless, the term does not have a fixed definition and has been applied broadly to any type of false information presented as news. It has also been used by high-profile people to apply to any news unfavorable to them. Further, disinformation involves spreading false information with harmful intent and is sometimes generated and propagated by hostile foreign actors, particularly during elections. In some definitions, fake news includes satirical articles misinterpreted as genuine, and articles that employ sensationalist or clickbait headlines that are not supported in the text. Because of this diversity of types of false news, researchers are beginning to favour information disorder as a more neutral and informative term.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">WikiTribune</span> For-profit, user-curated news website

WikiTribune was a news wiki where volunteers wrote and curated articles about widely publicised news by proof-reading, fact-checking, suggesting possible changes, and adding sources from other, usually long established outlets. Jimmy Wales, co-founder of Wikipedia, announced the site in April 2017 as a for-profit site, not affiliated with Wikipedia or its support organisation, the Wikimedia Foundation. Until October 2018, WikiTribune employed journalists with established backgrounds in the profession who researched, syndicated, and reported news. Its website is now a redirect to WT Social.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Full Fact</span> British fact-checking organisation

Full Fact is a British charity, based in London, which checks and corrects facts reported in the news as well as claims which circulate on social media.

Alt News is an Indian non-profit fact checking website founded and run by former software engineer Pratik Sinha and Mohammed Zubair. It was launched on 9 February 2017 to combat fake news. Alt News was a signatory partner of the International Fact-Checking Network until April 2020.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Vera Files</span> News organization in the Philippines

Vera Files is a non-profit online news organization in the Philippines, known for its institutionalized role in fact-checking false information in the Philippines, and as one of the news organizations most prominently targeted by intimidation and censorship due to its critical coverage of the Philippine government. It is part of the International Fact-Checking Network of the Poynter Institute and is one of Facebook's two Philippine partners in its third-party fact-checking program.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Media Bias/Fact Check</span> American website

Media Bias/Fact Check (MBFC) is an American website founded in 2015 by Dave M. Van Zandt. It considers four main categories and multiple subcategories in assessing the "political bias" and "factual reporting" of media outlets, relying on a self-described "combination of objective measures and subjective analysis".

Fake news and similar false information is fostered and spread across India through word of mouth, traditional media and more recently through digital forms of communication such as edited videos, websites, blogs, memes, unverified advertisements and social media propagated rumours. Fake news spread through social media in the country has become a serious problem, with the potential of it resulting in mob violence, as was the case where at least 20 people were killed in 2018 as a result of misinformation circulated on social media.

The StopFake website is a project of Ukrainian media NGO Media Reforms Center. It was founded in March 2014 by Ukrainian professors and students with the stated purpose of refuting Russian propaganda and fake news. It began as a Russian- and English-language fact-checking organization, and has grown to include a TV show broadcast on 30 local channels, a weekly radio show, and a strong social media following.

<i>OpIndia</i> Indian far-right pro-Hindutva news portal

OpIndia is an Indian far-right news website known for frequently publishing misinformation. Founded in December 2014, the website has published fake news and Islamophobic commentary on numerous occasions. OpIndia is dedicated to criticism of what it considers liberal media, and to support of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Hindutva ideology. According to University of Maryland researchers, OpIndia has shamed journalists it deems to be in opposition to the BJP and has alleged media bias against Hindus and the BJP.

Faktograf.hr is a Croatian fact-checking website set up in 2015 by the Croatian Journalists' Association and GONG. It is a member of the International Fact Checking Network and, since April 2019, part of Facebook's Third Party Fact Checking program. As of 2019, it is the only media organization in Croatia specialized in fact checking.

Our.News was a fact-checking platform that provided "nutritional labels" combining automated and user-assigned scores to rate the reliability of news articles.

References

  1. 1 2 Timmons, Heather; Kozlowska, Hanna (April 27, 2018). "200,000 volunteers have become the fact checkers of the internet". Quartz .
  2. ↑ Hsu, Cheng; Li, Cheng-Te; Saez-Trumper, Diego; Hsu, Yi-Zhan (2021). "WikiContradiction: Detecting Self-Contradiction Articles on Wikipedia". 2021 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data). pp. 427–436. arXiv: 2111.08543 . doi:10.1109/BigData52589.2021.9671319. ISBN   978-1-6654-3902-2. S2CID   244130115.
  3. 1 2 Glaser, April (August 14, 2018). "YouTube Is Adding Fact-Check Links for Videos on Topics That Inspire Conspiracy Theories". Slate Magazine .
  4. 1 2 3 Flynn, Kerry (October 5, 2017). "Facebook outsources its fake news problem to Wikipedia—and an army of human moderators". Mashable .
  5. ↑ Benjakob, Omer (August 4, 2020). "Why Wikipedia is immune to coronavirus". Haaretz .
  6. 1 2 3 4 Iannucci, Rebecca (July 6, 2017). "What can fact-checkers learn from Wikipedia? We asked the boss of its nonprofit owner". Poynter Institute .
  7. ↑ Cox, Joseph (August 11, 2014). "Why People Trust Wikipedia More Than the News". Vice .
  8. 1 2 Zachary McDowell; Matthew A. Vetter (July 2020). "It Takes a Village to Combat a Fake News Army: Wikipedia's Community and Policies for Information Literacy". Social Media + Society. 6 (3): 205630512093730. doi:10.1177/2056305120937309. ISSN   2056-3051. Wikidata   Q105083357.
  9. 1 2 3 Montgomery, Blake; Mac, Ryan; Warzel, Charlie (March 13, 2018). "YouTube Said It Will Link To Wikipedia Excerpts On Conspiracy Videos — But It Didn't Tell Wikipedia". BuzzFeed News .
  10. ↑ Feldman, Brian (March 16, 2018). "Why Wikipedia Works". Intelligencer. New York.
  11. ↑ Feldman, Brian (March 14, 2018). "Wikipedia Is Not Going to Save YouTube From Misinformation". Intelligencer. New York.
  12. ↑ Locker, Melissa (October 5, 2017). "Facebook thinks the answer to its fake news problems is Wikipedia". Fast Company .
  13. ↑ Perez, Sarah (June 11, 2020). "Facebook tests Wikipedia-powered information panels, similar to Google, in its search results". TechCrunch .
  14. ↑ Caulfield, Mike; Wineburg, Samuel S. (2023). Verified: how to think straight, get duped less, and make better decisions about what to believe online. Chicago London: The University of Chicago Press. ISBN   978-0-226-82984-5.
  15. ↑ DiResta, Renee (2024). "Part II Chapter 9". Invisible rulers: the people who turn lies into reality. New York: PublicAffairs. ISBN   978-1-5417-0339-1.
  16. ↑ Keller, Jared (June 14, 2017). "How Wikipedia Is Cultivating an Army of Fact Checkers to Battle Fake News". Pacific Standard .
  17. ↑ Rodriguez, Ashley (February 10, 2017). "In a first, Wikipedia has deemed the Daily Mail too "unreliable" to be used as a citation". Quartz .
  18. 1 2 "Wikipedia:Verifiability", Wikipedia, April 18, 2022, retrieved April 19, 2022
  19. ↑ Hsu, Cheng; Li, Cheng-Te; Saez-Trumper, Diego; Hsu, Yi-Zhan (December 15, 2021). "WikiContradiction: Detecting Self-Contradiction Articles on Wikipedia". 2021 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data). Orlando, FL, USA: IEEE. pp. 427–436. arXiv: 2111.08543 . doi:10.1109/BigData52589.2021.9671319. ISBN   978-1-6654-3902-2. S2CID   244130115.
  20. 1 2 Funke, Daniel (June 18, 2018). "Wikipedia vandalism could thwart hoax-busting on Google, YouTube and Facebook". Poynter. Poynter Institute.
  21. ↑ A.E.S. (January 15, 2016). "Wikipedia celebrates its first 15 years". The Economist.
  22. ↑ "Wikipedia:Vandalism", Wikipedia, April 16, 2022, retrieved April 19, 2022

Further consideration

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.