Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3184558.3188728acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesthewebconfConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Free access

Misleading or Falsification: Inferring Deceptive Strategies and Types in Online News and Social Media

Published: 23 April 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Deceptive information in online news and social media has had dramatic effect on our society in recent years. This study is the first to gain deeper insights into writers' intent behind digital misinformation by analyzing psycholinguistic signals: moral foundations and connotations extracted from different types of deceptive news ranging from strategic disinformation to propaganda and hoaxes. To ensure consistency of our findings and generalizability across domains, we experiment with data from: (1) confirmed cases of disinformation in news summaries, (2) propaganda, hoax, and disinformation news pages, and (3) social media news. We first contrast lexical markers of biased language, syntactic and stylistic signals, and connotations across deceptive news types including disinformation, propaganda, and hoaxes, and deceptive strategies including misleading or falsification. We then incorporate these insights to build machine learning and deep learning predictive models to infer deception strategies and deceptive news types. Our experimental results demonstrate that unlike earlier work on deception detection, content combined with biased language markers, moral foundations, and connotations leads to better predictive performance of deception strategies compared to syntactic and stylistic signals (as reported in earlier work on deceptive reviews). Falsification strategy is easier to identify than misleading strategy. Disinformation is more difficult to predict than to propaganda or hoaxes. Deceptive news types (disinformation, propaganda, and hoaxes), unlike deceptive strategies (falsification and misleading), are more salient, and thus easier to identify in tweets than in news reports. Finally, our novel connotation analysis across deception types provides deeper understanding of writers' perspectives and therefore reveals the intentions behind digital misinformation.

References

[1]
Darren Scott Appling, Erica J. Briscoe, and Clayton J. Hutto. 2015. Discriminative Models for Predicting Deception Strategies Proceedings of WWW. 947--952.
[2]
Eytan Bakshy, Jake M Hofman, Winter A Mason, and Duncan J Watts. 2011. Everyone's an influencer: quantifying influence on twitter Proceedings of WSDM. 65--74.
[3]
Erica J Briscoe, D Scott Appling, and Heather Hayes. 2014. Cues to deception in social media communications. International Conference on System Sciences. 1435--1443.
[4]
David B Buller, Judee K Burgoon, JA Daly, and JM Wiemann. 1994. Deception: Strategic and nonstrategic communication. Strategic interpersonal communication (1994), 191--223.
[5]
Dallas Card, Amber E Boydstun, Justin H Gross, Philip Resnik, and Noah A Smith. 2015. The media frames corpus: Annotations of frames across issues Proceedings of ACL. 438--444.
[6]
Carlos Castillo, Marcelo Mendoza, and Barbara Poblete. 2011. Information credibility on Twitter. In Proceedings of WWW. 675--684.
[7]
Meeyoung Cha, Hamed Haddadi, Fabricio Benevenuto, and P Krishna Gummadi. 2010. Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy. Proceedings of ICWSM, Vol. 10, 10--17 (2010), 30.
[8]
Justin Cheng, Cristian Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, Jure Leskovec, and Michael Bernstein. 2017. Anyone Can Become a Troll. American Scientist, Vol. 105, 3 (2017), 152.
[9]
Eunsol Choi, Chenhao Tan, Lillian Lee, Cristian Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, and Jennifer Spindel. 2012. Hedge detection as a lens on framing in the GMO debates: A position paper Proceedings of the Workshop on Extra-Propositional Aspects of Meaning in Computational Linguistics. 70--79.
[10]
Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia, Prashant Shiralkar, Luis M Rocha, Johan Bollen, Filippo Menczer, and Alessandro Flammini. 2015. Computational fact checking from knowledge networks. PloS one, Vol. 10, 6 (2015), e0128193.
[11]
Niall J Conroy, Victoria L Rubin, and Yimin Chen. 2015. Automatic deception detection: methods for finding fake news. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 52, 1 (2015), 1--4.
[12]
Bella M DePaulo, James J Lindsay, Brian E Malone, Laura Muhlenbruck, Kelly Charlton, and Harris Cooper. 2003. Cues to deception. Psychological bulletin Vol. 129, 1 (2003), 74.
[13]
Paul Ekman and Wallace V Friesen. 1969. Nonverbal leakage and clues to deception. Psychiatry, Vol. 32, 1 (1969), 88--106.
[14]
Song Feng, Ritwik Banerjee, and Yejin Choi. 2012 a. Syntactic stylometry for deception detection. In Proceedings of ACL. 171--175.
[15]
Song Feng, Longfei Xing, Anupam Gogar, and Yejin Choi. 2012 b. Distributional Footprints of Deceptive Product Reviews. Proceedings of ICWSM Vol. 12 (2012), 98--105.
[16]
Emilio Ferrara. 2017. Disinformation and social bot operations in the run up to the 2017 French presidential election. (2017).
[17]
Eileen Fitzpatrick and Joan Bachenko. 2012. Building a data collection for deception research. Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Approaches to Deception Detection. 31--38.
[18]
Fortune. 2016. Fake Bloomberg news report drives Twitter stock up 8%. http://fortune.com/2015/07/14/fake-twitter-bloomberg-report/. (2016). Accessed: 2016--12--12.
[19]
Maria Glenski, Ellyn Ayton, Dustin Arendt, and Svitlana Volkova. 2017. Fishing for Clickbaits in Social Images and Texts with Linguistically-Infused Neural Network Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.06390 (2017).
[20]
Jesse Graham, Jonathan Haidt, and Brian A Nosek. 2009. Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 96, 5 (2009), 1029.
[21]
Guardian. 2015. Woman dies after taking "diet pills" bought over internet. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/21/woman-dies-after-taking-diet-pills-bought-over-internet. (2015).
[22]
Jonathan Haidt and Jesse Graham. 2007. When morality opposes justice: Conservatives have moral intuitions that liberals may not recognize. Social Justice Research Vol. 20, 1 (2007), 98--116.
[23]
Jonathan Haidt and Craig Joseph. 2004. Intuitive ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues. Daedalus, Vol. 133, 4 (2004), 55--66.
[24]
Joan B. Hooper. 1975. On assertive predicates. In Syntax and Semantics, bibfieldeditorJ. Kimball (Ed.), Vol. Vol. 4. 91--124.
[25]
Lee Howell. 2013. Digital wildfires in a hyperconnected world. WEF Report (2013).
[26]
Ken Hyland. 2005. Metadiscourse. Wiley Online Library.
[27]
Fang Jin, Wei Wang, Liang Zhao, Edward Dougherty, Yang Cao, Chang-Tien Lu, and Naren Ramakrishnan. 2014. Misinformation propagation in the age of Twitter. Computer, Vol. 47, 12 (2014), 90--94.
[28]
Lauri Karttunen. 1971. Implicative verbs. Language (1971), 340--358.
[29]
Paul Kiparsky and Carol Kiparsky. 1968. Fact. Indiana University.
[30]
Srijan Kumar, Robert West, and Jure Leskovec. 2016. Disinformation on the Web: Impact, Characteristics, and Detection of Wikipedia Hoaxes Proceedings of WWW. 591--602.
[31]
Kenton Lee, Yoav Artzi, Yejin Choi, and Luke Zettlemoyer. 2015. Event Detection and Factuality Assessment with Non-Expert Supervision. Proceedings of EMNLP (2015).
[32]
Newton Lee. 2014. Misinformation and Disinformation. Facebook Nation. Springer, 169--188.
[33]
Kristina Lerman and Rumi Ghosh. 2010. Information contagion: An empirical study of the spread of news on Digg and Twitter social networks. Proceedings of ICWSM (2010), 90--97.
[34]
Cristian Lumezanu, Nick Feamster, and Hans Klein. 2012. # bias: Measuring the tweeting behavior of propagandists. (2012).
[35]
Feamster Lumezanu and H Klein. 2012. Measuring the tweeting behavior of propagandists. Proceedings of ICWSM.
[36]
Rada Mihalcea and Carlo Strapparava. 2009. The lie detector: Explorations in the automatic recognition of deceptive language Proceedings of the ACL-IJCNLP. 309--312.
[37]
Tanushree Mitra, Graham P Wright, and Eric Gilbert. 2017. A parsimonious language model of social media credibility across disparate events Proceedings of CSCW. 126--145.
[38]
Bjarke Mønsted, Piotr Sapie.zy'nski, Emilio Ferrara, and Sune Lehmann. 2017. Evidence of complex contagion of information in social media: An experiment using Twitter bots. PLOS ONE, Vol. 12, 9 (09. 2017), 1--12.
[39]
Matthew L Newman, James W Pennebaker, Diane S Berry, and Jane M Richards. 2003. Lying words: Predicting deception from linguistic styles. Personality and social psychology bulletin Vol. 29, 5 (2003), 665--675.
[40]
NYTimes. 2016. Google and Facebook Take Aim at Fake News Sites. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/technology/google-will-ban-websites-that-host-fake-news-from-using-its-ad-service.html. (2016).
[41]
Myle Ott, Yejin Choi, Claire Cardie, and Jeffrey T Hancock. 2011. Finding deceptive opinion spam by any stretch of the imagination Proceedings of ACL-HLT. 309--319.
[42]
F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. Thirion, O. Grisel, M. Blondel, P. Prettenhofer, R. Weiss, V. Dubourg, J. Vanderplas, A. Passos, D. Cournapeau, M. Brucher, M. Perrot, and E. Duchesnay. 2011. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research Vol. 12 (2011), 2825--2830.
[43]
James W Pennebaker, Martha E Francis, and Roger J Booth. 2001. Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC 2001. Mahway: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Vol. 71 (2001), 2001.
[44]
Jeffrey Pennington, Richard Socher, and Christopher Manning. 2014. Glove: Global vectors for word representation. In Proceedings EMNLP. 1532--1543.
[45]
Verónica Pérez-Rosas, Bennett Kleinberg, Alexandra Lefevre, and Rada Mihalcea. 2017. Automatic Detection of Fake News. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.07104 (2017).
[46]
Verónica Pérez-Rosas and Rada Mihalcea. 2015. Experiments in Open Domain Deception Detection. Proceedings of EMNLP (2015), 1120--1125.
[47]
Slav Petrov. 2016. Announcing SyntaxNet: The World's Most Accurate Parser Goes Open Source. Google Research Blog, May Vol. 12 (2016), 2016.
[48]
Vahed Qazvinian, Emily Rosengren, Dragomir R Radev, and Qiaozhu Mei. 2011. Rumor has it: Identifying misinformation in microblogs Proceedings of EMNLP. 1589--1599.
[49]
Hannah Rashkin, Eric Bell, Yejin Choi, and Svitlana Volkova. 2017 a. Multilingual Connotation Frames: A Case Study on Social Media for Targeted Sentiment Analysis and Forecast. In Proceedings of ACL, Vol. Vol. 2. 459--464.
[50]
Hannah Rashkin, Eunsol Choi, Jin Yea Jang, Svitlana Volkova, and Yejin Choi. 2017 b. Truth of varying shades: Analyzing language in fake news and political fact-checking Proceedings of EMNLP. 2921--2927.
[51]
Hannah Rashkin, Sameer Singh, and Yejin Choi. 2016. Connotation Frames: A Data-Driven Investigation. Proceedings of ACL. 311--321.
[52]
Marta Recasens, Cristian Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, and Dan Jurafsky. 2013. Linguistic Models for Analyzing and Detecting Biased Language Proceedings of ACL. 1650--1659.
[53]
Victoria L Rubin. 2010. On deception and deception detection: Content analysis of computer-mediated stated beliefs. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 47, 1 (2010), 1--10.
[54]
Victoria L Rubin, Yimin Chen, and Niall J Conroy. 2015. Deception detection for news: three types of fakes. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 52, 1 (2015), 1--4.
[55]
Victoria L Rubin, Niall J Conroy, Yimin Chen, and Sarah Cornwell. 2016. Fake News or Truth Using Satirical Cues to Detect Potentially Misleading News Proceedings of NAACL-HLT. 7--17.
[56]
Kate Starbird. 2017. Examining the Alternative Media Ecosystem Through the Production of Alternative Narratives of Mass Shooting Events on Twitter. Proceedings of ICWSM. 230--239.
[57]
Bruno Takahashi, Edson C Tandoc, and Christine Carmichael. 2015. Communicating on Twitter during a disaster: An analysis of tweets during Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines. Computers in Human Behavior Vol. 50 (2015), 392--398.
[58]
Marcella Tambuscio, Giancarlo Ruffo, Alessandro Flammini, and Filippo Menczer. 2015. Fact-checking effect on viral hoaxes: A model of misinformation spread in social networks Proceedings of WWW. 977--982.
[59]
Michail Tsikerdekis and Sherali Zeadally. 2014. Online deception in social media. Commun. ACM Vol. 57, 9 (2014), 72--80.
[60]
Onur Varol, Emilio Ferrara, Clayton A Davis, Filippo Menczer, and Alessandro Flammini. 2017. Online human-bot interactions: Detection, estimation, and characterization Proceedings of ICWSM. 280--289.
[61]
Svitlana Volkova, Kyle Shaffer, Jin Yean Jang, and Nathan Hodas. 2017. Separating Facts from Fiction: Linguistic Models to Classify Suspicious and Trusted News Posts on Twitter. In Proceedings of ACL. 647--653.
[62]
William Yang Wang. 2017. "Liar, Liar Pants on Fire": A New Benchmark Dataset for Fake News Detection Proceedings of ACL. 422--426.
[63]
Miron Zuckerman, Richard Koestner, and Robert Driver. 1981. Beliefs about cues associated with deception. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior Vol. 6, 2 (1981), 105--114.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Intelligent Clickbait News Detection System Based on Artificial Intelligence and Feature EngineeringIEEE Transactions on Engineering Management10.1109/TEM.2022.321570971(12509-12518)Online publication date: 2024
  • (2024)Early Detection and Prevention of Malicious User Behavior on Twitter Using Deep Learning TechniquesIEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems10.1109/TCSS.2024.341917111:5(6649-6661)Online publication date: Oct-2024
  • (2024)Detecting fake news on social networks via linguistic features and information-seeking patterns during the Covid-19 periodAnnals of Operations Research10.1007/s10479-024-06388-5Online publication date: 26-Nov-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Misleading or Falsification: Inferring Deceptive Strategies and Types in Online News and Social Media

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      WWW '18: Companion Proceedings of the The Web Conference 2018
      April 2018
      2023 pages
      ISBN:9781450356404
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Sponsors

      • IW3C2: International World Wide Web Conference Committee

      In-Cooperation

      Publisher

      International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee

      Republic and Canton of Geneva, Switzerland

      Publication History

      Published: 23 April 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. connotation analysis
      2. deception
      3. deep learning
      4. machine learning
      5. misinformation
      6. natural language processing
      7. social media analysis

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Funding Sources

      • Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program at PNNL a national laboratory operated by Battelle for the U.S. DoE.

      Conference

      WWW '18
      Sponsor:
      • IW3C2
      WWW '18: The Web Conference 2018
      April 23 - 27, 2018
      Lyon, France

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate 1,899 of 8,196 submissions, 23%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)741
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)101
      Reflects downloads up to 25 Nov 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)Intelligent Clickbait News Detection System Based on Artificial Intelligence and Feature EngineeringIEEE Transactions on Engineering Management10.1109/TEM.2022.321570971(12509-12518)Online publication date: 2024
      • (2024)Early Detection and Prevention of Malicious User Behavior on Twitter Using Deep Learning TechniquesIEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems10.1109/TCSS.2024.341917111:5(6649-6661)Online publication date: Oct-2024
      • (2024)Detecting fake news on social networks via linguistic features and information-seeking patterns during the Covid-19 periodAnnals of Operations Research10.1007/s10479-024-06388-5Online publication date: 26-Nov-2024
      • (2024)Cultural Violence and Peace Interventions in Social MediaInformation Technology for Peace and Security10.1007/978-3-658-44810-3_18(379-410)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2024
      • (2023)Analyzing the Spread of Misinformation on Social Networks: A Process and Software Architecture for Detection and AnalysisComputers10.3390/computers1211023212:11(232)Online publication date: 14-Nov-2023
      • (2023)Methodological Approaches to the Study of Distorted InformationCommunicology10.21453/2311-3065-2023-11-1-15-3011:1(15-30)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2023
      • (2023)A two‐step approach to detect and understand dismisinformation events occurring in social media: A case study with critical timesJournal of Contingencies and Crisis Management10.1111/1468-5973.1248331:4(826-842)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2023
      • (2023)SoK: Content Moderation in Social Media, from Guidelines to Enforcement, and Research to Practice2023 IEEE 8th European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P)10.1109/EuroSP57164.2023.00056(868-895)Online publication date: Jul-2023
      • (2023)Achieving Online and Scalable Information Integrity by Harnessing Social Spam CorrelationsIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2023.323660411(7768-7781)Online publication date: 2023
      • (2022)The Influence of Fake News on Social Media: Analysis and Verification of Web Content during the COVID-19 Pandemic by Advanced Machine Learning Methods and Natural Language ProcessingSustainability10.3390/su14171046614:17(10466)Online publication date: 23-Aug-2022
      • Show More Cited By

      View Options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format.

      HTML Format

      Login options

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media