Making the news wires today is a very original new study looking at the spread of true and false news on Twitter. In case you haven’t seen it, here’s the link: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6380/1146.full.
The upshot? Truth doesn’t stand a chance. Lies spread much faster, farther and deeper than truth. Quantifying an eons-old philosophical debate here, researchers found that it takes the truth about six times as long as lies to reach 1500 people. Fake political news is more viral than any other kind, reaching 20,000+ people nearly three-times faster than it takes all other types of fake news to reach 10,000 people. News about politics, urban legends, and science spread to the most people, whereas news about politics and urban legends spread the fastest and are the most viral.
What does this mean for science communication? Maybe that the truth can’t win on Twitter---it’s the wrong tool for combatting the Infowars type of onslaught we’re facing today. The solution? With regard to science communication, does it mean we shouldn’t engage in these conversations on Twitter and just focus instead on improving science literacy through actual teaching tools? Or should science keep plugging away on Twitter and be happy we reach at least some people this way?
Best,
Glenn
Glenn Hampson
Executive Director
Science Communication Institute (SCI)
Program Director
Open Scholarship Initiative (OSI)
2320 N 137th Street | Seattle, WA 98133
(206) 417-3607 | gham...@nationalscience.org | nationalscience.org
While not in this specific context, friend of RSComm, Jason Steinhauer, has been talking quite a bit about the spread of fake news and how that interacts with science communication, history communication, and even how we learn about the media itself: https://www.fpri.org/article/2017/06/fake-news-fake-history/
These aren't easy questions to answer, but there is momentum behind researchers getting together to speak out and become advocates, which had been almost taboo for some time. Very interesting to see the shift through the last few years.
Eric
Please chat away Jason! What do you think about this study? Anything new/revealing? Anything relevant to scicomm that should be mentioned? Another tie-in, of course, is the highly popular “Calling Bullshit” course developed here in Seattle at the University of Washington by Jevin West and Carl Bergstrom (http://callingbullshit.org/).
Thanks!
Glenn
Glenn Hampson
Executive Director
Science Communication Institute (SCI)
Program Director
Open Scholarship Initiative (OSI)
2320 N 137th Street | Seattle, WA 98133
(206) 417-3607 | gham...@nationalscience.org | nationalscience.org
From: Jason Steinhauer <jms...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, March 9, 2018 6:46 PM
To: Eric L Olson <eol...@gmu.edu>
Cc: Glenn Hampson <gham...@nationalscience.org>; rsc...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: The truth always wins? Maybe not.
Thanks, Eric. Happy to chat about this any time. This is my favorite topic.
Personally, I don't believe it is doom and gloom for truth, facts and research.
Jason, myself, and another colleague did a conference talk last year on how science and history communication overlap a great deal with media literacy and the deep need for this to be taken seriously in the US (where we lag behind the rest of the global north is a big way). That, of course, is a very hot topic these days.
E