The Nature and Countermeasures of Fake News: Focusing on Structure and Actors, Based on an Awareness Survey

YouTube Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZZWuLwNYHM

Editor's Note

Professor Yoon Sung-i of Kyung Hee University noted that individuals' judgment and choices regarding fake news cannot be entirely autonomous and are inevitably influenced by socio-political structures and the media environment. He discussed the processes and causes of fake news production and dissemination. The awareness survey results indicated that 81% of respondents perceived the problems caused by fake news as serious. Professor Yoon analyzed the actors and structural variables influencing the reception of fake news, concluding that political polarization structures, such as strong like/dislike sentiments towards specific politicians (President Yoon Suk-yeol, Representative Lee Jae-myung) and perceptions of ideological conflict, were the most significant factors affecting fake news reception.

f2e34dd1a320d063

Download: Full Presentation | Presentation Slides

Full Presentation

Professor Yoon Sung-i, Kyung Hee University: Hello. The topic I will cover is "The Nature and Countermeasures of Fake News: Focusing on Structure and Actors, Based on an Awareness Survey." Fake news has emerged as a very serious issue not only in Korea but globally in recent years. I will discuss why it has become such a serious socio-political issue in recent years, although the problem of fake news itself is very old.

As indicated in the topic, I will discuss the nature of the problem and how we should respond by comparing two types of variables: structural and actor-based.

First, I examined this issue from the perspective of the broader environment surrounding fake news, a meta-level perspective. Fake news is fundamentally closely linked to socio-structural changes in the era of post-truth. As you know, the era of post-truth is characterized by personal emotions and beliefs having a greater influence on public opinion formation than objective facts. Furthermore, relativistic values dominate our judgment of situations, leading to an era where anxiety and crisis are amplified. This is the era of post-truth.

I will briefly touch upon existing research. Much research suggests that in an environment where the truth is unclear, the effort to find alternative facts is related to fake news. Additionally, people fall into confirmation bias when consuming fake news. This leads to social problems. There are two main explanations for why fake news is shared: the ignorance theory and the polarization theory. The ignorance theory refers to a lack of cognitive reflection on the situation, and a deficiency in cognitive and knowledge-based aspects such as political knowledge and digital literacy, which leads to the sharing of fake news. This perspective focuses on the accuracy of information.

The polarization theory posits that fake news is consumed due to an attitude of selectively accepting information to achieve specific goals. The primary motivation for consuming fake news is a negative sentiment towards the opposing political party. Therefore, fake news is consumed with a specific purpose.

I briefly examined the current state of awareness regarding fake news. As the director mentioned, a high percentage of respondents indicated that fake news is serious and likely to deceive, and more than half agreed that it should be regulated.

We have briefly examined the current status of awareness regarding fake news. As the Director mentioned, the proportion of those who believe fake news is serious and likely to be deceived is quite high, and more than half also expressed the opinion that it should be regulated.

Regarding responsibility for the production and dissemination of fake news, YouTube, politicians, and the media were all cited with high responsibility. Among these, many opinions pointed to the responsibility of conservative YouTube channels and progressive YouTube channels. Furthermore, perceptions of fake news diffusion indicated that social media spreads it and that falsehoods spread faster. Many also felt that distinguishing between truth and falsehood is difficult. Thus, the current state of fake news dissemination and concerns about it appear to be quite serious.

When asked if they had encountered fake news, men reported slightly higher rates. Additionally, those with higher political interest and political knowledge were more likely to have encountered fake news. "Consuming fake news" was defined as believing fake news to be true.

We investigated a total of eight pieces of fake news. Four were classified as conservative fake news, which conservatives would want to believe, and four were classified as progressive fake news, which progressives would want to read. We then analyzed which factor, actor-based or structural, had a greater influence on reception.

Overall, the degree of fake news reception was very high. Furthermore, reception of progressive fake news was higher than that of conservative fake news. While there can be various interpretations for this higher rate, my interpretation is that the progressive fake news presented here involves issues and controversies that are currently more politically charged.

I believe this might be the reason, compared to the conservative news.

We conducted a linear regression analysis. For the actor-based independent variables, we included factors from gender to efficacy. For the dependent variable, we analyzed factors influencing the reception of conservative fake news. The significant factors were stratum, education level, ideology, political knowledge, and efficacy. Regarding the second point, public officials do not seem to listen to the thoughts of ordinary citizens. For progressive fake news, age, ideology, and efficacy were significant.

Next, we examined the structural factors.

Out of a total of 1,247 respondents, 209 considered all four pieces of conservative fake news to be true, whereas 448 considered all four pieces of progressive fake news to be true, a significantly higher number. When asked about like/dislike sentiments towards Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung, these variables emerged as the most influential factors in the reception of conservative fake news.

The linear regression analysis also shows that like/dislike sentiments towards Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung had the greatest influence, as indicated by the beta values. Following these, conflict structure variables such as Yeongnam-Honam conflict and ruling-opposition party conflict were also significant. For progressive fake news, sentiments towards Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung were also high, with sentiments towards Yoon Suk-yeol showing the highest beta value.

Next were the ruling-opposition party conflict variables. We compared the influence of actor-based and structural factors by including both. Looking at the following table, the structural factors are in the lower section, and the variable with the largest beta value is the like/dislike sentiment towards Yoon Suk-yeol. Among all variables, sentiment towards Yoon Suk-yeol had the greatest impact on whether or not fake news was received. The like/dislike sentiment towards Lee Jae-myung was also significant, and among actor variables, age and stratum had a relatively low but significant impact. The previous analysis was for conservative fake news; for progressive fake news, sentiments towards Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung also had the greatest influence.

As shown in the table, the beta value for the like/dislike sentiment towards Yoon Suk-yeol was overwhelmingly large at -0.445, followed by the like/dislike sentiment towards Lee Jae-myung. Among actor variables, only age showed a significant influence, and it was relatively weak. Overall, structural factors have a much greater influence than actor factors.

Among all variables, those that influenced both conservative and progressive fake news reception were age, like/dislike sentiments towards Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung, and perceptions of ruling-opposition party conflict—four variables in total. Among these, the strongest influence came from the emotional sentiment towards President Yoon Suk-yeol.

This aligns with previous research on Korean politics, which has often highlighted personality politics and discussed how sentiments and preferences towards the president or leaders of a faction are the most crucial variables in social conflict. Research on fake news shows a similar pattern.

To summarize the conclusion: Similar to cases in the United States and other countries, political polarization structures in Korea have been confirmed as the most influential variable in the reception of fake news. Although a majority of respondents indicated that fake news should be regulated, it is questionable how effectively regulation alone can resolve the issue of fake news. As mentioned earlier, the dissemination of fake news is intertwined with societal changes such as the era of post-truth and transitional periods, making direct countermeasures not simple and long-term solutions difficult.

Let's look at the final slide. Political polarization is a significant variable because even when people seek genuine news, they tend to exclusively consume biased news similar to their ideological orientation. When they create "alternative facts" from this biased consumption, it can have negative consequences, similar to fake news. The consumption of such biased news and the creation of "alternative truths" ultimately stem from the problem of political polarization within the political structure. Therefore, the ultimate solution lies in resolving political polarization. This is the core message of my presentation. Thank you. I will conclude here. ■

■ Yoon Sung-i, Professor, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Kyung Hee University.

■ Managed and Edited by: Kim Sun-hee, Senior Researcher, EAI, Park Ji-soo, Researcher, EAI

    Inquiries: 02 2277 1683 (ext. 208) | jspark@eai.or.kr

Video Transcript

The topic I will cover is "The Nature and Countermeasures of Fake News: Focusing on Structure and Actors, Based on an Awareness Survey." Fake news has emerged as a very serious issue not only in Korea but globally in recent years. I will discuss why it has become such a serious socio-political issue in recent years, although the problem of fake news itself is very old. As indicated in the topic, I will discuss the nature of the problem and how we should respond by comparing two types of variables: structural and actor-based. First, I examined this issue from the perspective of the broader environment surrounding fake news, a meta-level perspective. Fake news is fundamentally closely linked to socio-structural changes in the era of post-truth. As you know, the era of post-truth is characterized by personal emotions and beliefs having a greater influence on public opinion formation than objective facts.

Furthermore, relativistic values dominate our judgment of situations, leading to an era where anxiety and crisis are amplified. This is the era of post-truth. I will briefly touch upon existing research. Much research suggests that in an environment where the truth is unclear, the effort to find alternative facts is related to fake news. Additionally, people fall into confirmation bias when consuming fake news. This leads to social problems.

There are two main explanations for why fake news is shared: the ignorance theory and the polarization theory. The ignorance theory refers to a lack of cognitive reflection on the situation, and a deficiency in cognitive and knowledge-based aspects such as political knowledge and digital literacy, which leads to the sharing of fake news. This perspective focuses on the accuracy of information. The polarization theory posits that fake news is consumed due to an attitude of selectively accepting information to achieve specific goals. The primary motivation for consuming fake news is a negative sentiment towards the opposing political party. Therefore, fake news is consumed with a specific purpose.

I briefly examined the current state of awareness regarding fake news. As the director mentioned, a high percentage of respondents indicated that fake news is serious and likely to deceive, and more than half agreed that it should be regulated. Regarding responsibility for the production and dissemination of fake news, YouTube, politicians, and the media were all cited with high responsibility. Among these, many opinions pointed to the responsibility of conservative YouTube channels and progressive YouTube channels. Furthermore, perceptions of fake news diffusion indicated that social media spreads it and that falsehoods spread faster. Many also felt that distinguishing between truth and falsehood is difficult. Thus, the current state of fake news dissemination and concerns about it appear to be quite serious. When asked if they had encountered fake news, men reported slightly higher rates. Additionally, those with higher political interest and political knowledge were more likely to have encountered fake news. "Consuming fake news" was defined as believing fake news to be true.

We investigated a total of eight pieces of fake news. Four were classified as conservative fake news, which conservatives would want to believe, and four were classified as progressive fake news, which progressives would want to read. We then analyzed which factor, actor-based or structural, had a greater influence on reception. Overall, the degree of fake news reception was very high. Furthermore, reception of progressive fake news was higher than that of conservative fake news. While there can be various interpretations for this higher rate, my interpretation is that the progressive fake news presented here involves issues and controversies that are currently more politically charged.

I believe this might be the reason, compared to the conservative news. We conducted a linear regression analysis. For the actor-based independent variables, we included factors from gender to efficacy. For the dependent variable, we analyzed factors influencing the reception of conservative fake news. The significant factors were stratum, education level, ideology, political knowledge, and efficacy. Regarding the second point, public officials do not seem to listen to the thoughts of ordinary citizens. For progressive fake news, age, ideology, and efficacy were significant. Next, we examined the structural factors. Out of a total of 1,247 respondents, 209 considered all four pieces of conservative fake news to be true, whereas 448 considered all four pieces of progressive fake news to be true, a significantly higher number. When asked about like/dislike sentiments towards Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung, these variables emerged as the most influential factors in the reception of conservative fake news.

The linear regression analysis also shows that like/dislike sentiments towards Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung had the greatest influence, as indicated by the beta values. Following these, conflict structure variables such as Yeongnam-Honam conflict and ruling-opposition party conflict were also significant. For progressive fake news, sentiments towards Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung were also high, with sentiments towards Yoon Suk-yeol showing the highest beta value. Next were the ruling-opposition party conflict variables. We compared the influence of actor-based and structural factors by including both. Looking at the following table, the structural factors are in the lower section, and the variable with the largest beta value is the like/dislike sentiment towards Yoon Suk-yeol. Among all variables, sentiment towards Yoon Suk-yeol had the greatest impact on whether or not fake news was received. The like/dislike sentiment towards Lee Jae-myung was also significant, and among actor variables, age and stratum had a relatively low but significant impact. The previous analysis was for conservative fake news; for progressive fake news, sentiments towards Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung also had the greatest influence.

As shown in the table, the beta value for the like/dislike sentiment towards Yoon Suk-yeol was overwhelmingly large at -0.445, followed by the like/dislike sentiment towards Lee Jae-myung. Among actor variables, only age showed a significant influence, and it was relatively weak. Overall, structural factors have a much greater influence than actor factors. Among all variables, those that influenced both conservative and progressive fake news reception were age, like/dislike sentiments towards Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung, and perceptions of ruling-opposition party conflict—four variables in total. Among these, the strongest influence came from the emotional sentiment towards President Yoon Suk-yeol. This aligns with previous research on Korean politics, which has often highlighted personality politics and discussed how sentiments and preferences towards the president or leaders of a faction are the most crucial variables in social conflict. Research on fake news shows a similar pattern.

To summarize the conclusion: Similar to cases in the United States and other countries, political polarization structures in Korea have been confirmed as the most influential variable in the reception of fake news. Although a majority of respondents indicated that fake news should be regulated, it is questionable how effectively regulation alone can resolve the issue of fake news.

As mentioned earlier, the dissemination of fake news is intertwined with societal changes such as the era of post-truth and transitional periods, making direct countermeasures not simple and long-term solutions difficult. Let's look at the final slide. Political polarization is a significant variable because even when people seek genuine news, they tend to exclusively consume biased news similar to their ideological orientation. When they create "alternative facts" from this biased consumption, it can have negative consequences, similar to fake news. The consumption of such biased news and the creation of "alternative truths" ultimately stem from the problem of political polarization within the political structure. Therefore, the ultimate solution lies in resolving political polarization. This is the core message of my presentation.