Tweet

@cheriangeorge

@Saarahuang

@hwasser

@ugemitch

@harsht

@CynPeacock

@cheriangeorge

@risj_oxford

More from @rasmus_kleis

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen

@rasmus_kleis

27 May

#infodemic, one year on. News orgs are the most widely used source of information about coronavirus and have become even more central because-while overall reach has declined compared to earlier in the pandemic-reach of other sources has declined more. reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/ongoing-infode… 1/9

Trust in news orgs declined by an average of 8 percentage points and trust in national governments has declined by average of 13pp. In most countries covered, national health authorities, global health authorities, and scientists+doctors+experts remain highly+broadly trusted 2/9

The 'trust gap' between coronavirus information from news organisations and information on different kinds of platforms remains pronounced. On average, gap btw news orgs and social media is 21pp, btw news and video sites 22pp, and btw news and messaging applications 28pp. 3/9

Read 9 tweets

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen

@rasmus_kleis

26 Feb

Ask scientists about peer review, and you’ll get… a lot of things. Boundary work (the institution grounds all scholarship), appreciation (collegial quality control=more rigorous work), and many dark sides (ie it's unreliable, unfair, unpaid, unequal, and done by #reviewer2) 1/19

Let me start here-I've internalized the boundary work. I believe in peer review, for all its imperfections. I think it is among things setting science apart. I've also spend lots of time on it, including dealing with 600+ manuscripts as journal editor, based on ~1000 reviews 2/19

But while important, peer review is not the ONLY thing that define science. Many different norms and institutions together define us. As Ziman writes: “peculiarity of science is that knowledge as such is deemed to be its principle product and purpose” cambridge.org/core/books/rea… 3/19

Read 20 tweets

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen

@rasmus_kleis

25 Feb

@farai

US Congress yesterday hosted hearing on disinformation & extremism in the media

Journalists should want to interrogate these issue

As @farai writes as"we are questioning all the systems of society, journalism cannot be too prideful to examine itself" faraic.medium.com/its-bigger-tha… 1/5

One place to start is this (scathing) article: "What is being called our post-truth era [illustrates] the racial amnesia that plagues much of our contemporary post-truth criticism" in light of how e.g. media and politics often represent many minorities doi.org/10.1080/147914… 2/5

And this observation by some top-notch social scientists (which to my knowledge has largely been ignored by news coverage?)"Our analysis suggest that mainstream news media in fact play a significant and important role in the dissemination of fake news" doi.org/10.1080/238089… 3/5

Read 5 tweets

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen

@rasmus_kleis

25 Feb

@EvelynDouek

Talked democratic creative destruction, filter bubbles, polarization, business of news, and media policy with @EvelynDouek and @QJurecic on the great @lawfareblog podcast - some links to underlying @risj_oxford in thread below

lawfareblog.com/lawfare-podcas… 1/6

@dragz

Here @dragz and I on “democratic creative destruction” challenging incumbent institutions, creates new ones, and in many ways empower individuals while also leaving both individuals & institutions increasingly dependent on large US-based tech companies cambridge.org/core/books/soc… 2/6

@dragz

On filter bubbles, this is something @dragz and I have examined e.g.

On social media: dx.doi.org/10.1177/146144…

And search: doi.org/10.1080/216708…

(Often overlooked bigger issue I personally think is inequality - e.g. with @tianyangyt et al pnas.org/content/117/46…)

3/6

Read 6 tweets

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen

@rasmus_kleis

19 Feb

@risj_oxford

Group discussion w/ @risj_oxford journalist fellows on which discussions are contentious in their newsrooms around 🌍, kicking off from some US journalists feeling dominant viewpoint limits their ability to speak up

Partial list (deep breath) of issues people identify as hard...

..including things that are hard to cover & write about such as

* Religion, esp dominant religious group or historically maligned religious groups
* Migration and refugees, esp in face of majoritarian backlash
* National security, esp in countries where military is very powerful

* Women's rights, esp in very patriarchal societies (and often patriarchal newsrooms)
* Sexuality, esp LGBT
* Tribalism, esp when interconnected with electoral politics and/or political violence
* Civil war (well yes that and the legacy it leaves is hard)
* Regionalism/separatism

Read 5 tweets

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen

@rasmus_kleis

19 Feb

@Commonlaw20

"How to respond to disinformation while respecting free speech?" - @Commonlaw20 and I wrote submission for @Irenekhan’s UN work on disinformation, drawing on @risj_oxford research and other relevant work. Some key points in thread, full submission here reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/risj-review/ho… 1/N

There is (a) no conceptual clarity and (b) no substantial agreement on what exactly constitutes disinfo. This is not a philosophical point but defining feature of problems we face. It underlines inherently political nature of determining what does and does not constitute disinfo.

From the point of view of the public disinformation is to a large extent a problem associated with the behaviour of politicians and other domestic actors, especially on social media, and not more narrowly a problem of false information or actors with more unambiguously ill intent

Read 14 tweets

Share this page!

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @rasmus_kleis

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Like this author's thread?