Discourses of fact-checking in Swedish news media
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-03-2021-0061 |
| Published date | 10 August 2021 |
| Date | 10 August 2021 |
| Pages | 125-140 |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science,Records management & preservation,Document management,Classification & cataloguing,Information behaviour & retrieval,Collection building & management,Scholarly communications/publishing,Information & knowledge management,Information management & governance,Information management,Information & communications technology,Internet |
| Author | Amalia Juneström |
Discourses of fact-checking in
Swedish news media
Amalia Junestr€
om
ALM, Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala, Sweden
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to examine how contemporary fact-checking is discursively
constructed in Swedish news media; this serves to gain insight into how this practice is understood in society.
Design/methodology/approach –A selection of texts on the topic of fact-checking published by two of
Sweden’s largest morning newspapers is analyzed through the lens of Fairclough’s discourse theoretical
framework.
Findings –Three key discourses of fact-checking were identified, each of which included multiple sub-
discourses. First, a discourse that has been labeled as “the affirmative discourse,”representing fact-checking as
something positive, was identified. This discourse embraces ideas about fact-checking as something that, for
example,strengthens democracy. Second, a contrasting discourse that has been labeled “the adverse discourse”
was identified. This discourse represents fact-checking as something precarious that, for example, poses a risk
to democracy. Third, a discourse labeled “the agency discourse”was identified. This discourse conveys ideas
on whose responsibility it is to conduct fact-checking.
Originality/value –A better understanding of the discursive construction of fact-checkingprovides insights
into social practices pertaining to it and the expectations of its role in contemporary society. The results are
relevant for journalists and professionals who engage in fact-checking and for others who have a particular
interest in fact-checking, e.g. librarians and educators engaged in media and information literacy projects.
Keywords Newspapers, Perception, Language, Communication, Attitudes, Information society
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Contemporary fact-checking originates in the USA, where a number of well-known fact-
checking organizations, including FactCheck and PolitiFact, have been engaging in the
practice for more than a decade. Brandtzaeg and Følstad (2017) divide fact-checking services
into three main categories. The first includes fact-checking services concerned with political
and public statements; the second includes organizations that aim to debunk online rumors;
and the third includes fact-checkers that are concerned with particular issues, e.g. a specific
political conflict. In Sweden, the best-known fact-checking project was Viralgranskaren,a
division at the Metro newspaper, which went out of business in 2019. Viralgranskaren was
set up in an attempt to verify or debunk rumors and news claims circulating on the Internet.
By analyzing a selection of texts published in two different major newspapers in Sweden,
Dagens Nyheter (DN) and Svenska Dagbladet (SvD), this study aims to identify key
discourses pertaining to fact-checking in Swedish news media and shed light on the
ideological beliefs and values attached to fact-checking in contemporary society.
This aim can be translated into two specific research questions:
RQ1. Which fact-checking discourses can be identified in the two newspapers?
Discourses of
fact-checking
125
© Amalia Junestr€
om. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and
create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full
attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://
creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
The author would like to thank her supervisors Professor Isto Huvila and AssociateProfessor Ulrika
Kjellman at Uppsala University and Professor Jutta Haider at Bor
as University.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/0022-0418.htm
Received 17 March 2021
Revised 13 July 2021
Accepted 17 July 2021
Journal of Documentation
Vol. 78 No. 7, 2022
pp. 125-140
Emerald Publishing Limited
0022-0418
DOI 10.1108/JD-03-2021-0061
RQ2. What do these discourses tell us about fact-checking as a social practice?
2. Literature review
The literature on fact-checking is closely tied to a growing body of research on
disinformation, misinformation and other forms of misrepresentative messages that are
communicated publicly, e.g. Iosifidis and Nicoli (2020) and Rubin (2019). There is a
considerable, growing body of conceptual research on mis- and disinformation and related
notions (e.g. Fallis, 2015;Søe, 2017,2021), as well as on, for example, automatic recognition of
false information. Other closely related topics of interest are those of news (Ireland, 2018;
Tamboer et al., 2020), media (Jones-Jang et al., 2021;Stamps, 2020) and information (Gibson
and Jacobson, 2018;Jacobson and Mackey, 2013) literacy. Although fact-checking, false
information and literacy research are related topics, this study focuses explicitly on fact-
checking as a human practice rather than on what constitutes a fact, or mis- and
disinformation.
While fact-checking is often understood as a genuinely journalistic practice, promoting
the ability to determine whether a piece of information is reliable or not also engages other
professional groups. Teaching information literacy has been embraced by librarians
(Alexander and Wood, 2019;Gibson and Jacobson, 2018;Ireland, 2018;LaPierre and Kitzie,
2019) and educators (Alexander and Wood, 2019;Lorenz et al., 2019). Fact-checking does,
however, differ from information and media literacy education. While fact-checking serves to
verify the accuracy of a piece of information, information literacy aims to develop the ability
to recognize whether it is trustworthy or not. Although the boundary between the scholarly
fields taking an interest in the two topics is not always sharp, the topics themselves represent
two fundamentally different approaches to tackling the experienced problem of false
information: information literacy education aims at empowering individuals, while fact-
checking aims at helping them with the subject matter (Huvila, 2012).
In the following, the state of affairs regarding research on fact-checking will be discussed
in relation to (1) its perceived benefits, (2) its drawbacks and (3) whose responsibility fact-
checking is understood to be.
2.1 The benefits of fact-checking
Fact-checking as a journalistic device to correct false statements and political disinformation
has gained increasing popularity in the contemporary news media landscape (Amazeen,
2019,2020;Graves, 2016;Marietta et al., 2015;Mena, 2019). It has, at least to a certain degree,
been found to be effective in correcting misrepresentations (Amazeen, 2015;Benegal and
Scruggs, 2018;Chan et al., 2017;Garrett et al., 2013). Scholarly literature also reflects ideas on
fact-checking as a tool for finding truth when evaluating political information. It is
understood as an instrument through which key journalistic principles can be supported
(Graves et al., 2016) and with which traditional ideals of journalism such as objectivity,
credibility and autonomy can be upheld (Amazeen, 2015;Damasceno and Patr
ıcio, 2020). In
their field experiment, Graves et al. (2016) found that the growing popularity of fact-checking
is largely a response to the way it “appeals to the professional values and status concerns of
journalists”(Graves et al., 2016, p. 121). Along the same lines, fact-checking has been
conceptualized as a democracy-enhancing device that benefits citizens and positively
impacts their perceptions of truth in relation to political issues (York et al., 2020).
2.2 The drawbacks of fact-checking
Although the bulk of academic research on fact-checking views the practice and its ability to
correct disinformation positively (Amazeen, 2019,2020;Graves, 2016,2018;Mena, 2019),
JD
78,7
126
To continue reading
Request your trial