‘Nepnieuws had little influence on outcome elections US’
Nepnieuws that using social media is distributed, has hardly any measurable impact on the results of the presidentsverkiezigen in the United States.
This conclusion scientists from the American universities Stanford and New York in a new study. Donald Trump won the elections convincingly of his rival Hillary Clinton.
Social media around the elections in the United States come under fire are because of the spread of nepnieuws that voters may be on the wrong leg. Nepnieuws is news that is not substantiated with facts, but as truth is brought in, often via dubious websites.
According to the researchers, were the nepnieuwsberichten on social media is not the main source for election news from Americans. Only 14 percent of the 1,200 responten says social media as a source to have used for their choice. Most of the people felt television should be more reliable.
The most widespread nepnieuwsberichten would only be a small part of the population are seen. Acknowledge the scientists that Trump online an advantage.
So were messages that were beneficial for Trump to 30 million times, shared on Facebook, while favorable stories for Clinton no more than 8 million times were shared.
It brands the researchers that only a fraction of the social media users themselves could remember what in the posts has been.
If nepnieuws of influence would have been, had each nepnieuwsbericht 0.7 percent of the Clinton voters and non-voters of their voice should change into a vote for Trump.
Each nepnieuwsbericht in this case, a power of 36 political televisiespotjes have, according to researchers.
Facebook has taken steps to combat the spread of nepnieuws via the social network. Users can only make a claim if they suspect that a message nepnieuws contains.
An independent agency that investigates every report whether or not there is nepnieuws. In that case, the messages a special flag that is very clear is that the news is based on facts.
How nepnieuws reports can be