IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsoctx/v14y2024i4p43-d1362701.html

Disinformation and Fact-Checking in the Face of Natural Disasters: A Case Study on Turkey–Syria Earthquakes

Author

Listed:
  • Sandra Méndez-Muros

    (Department of Journalism II, University of Seville, Avda. Américo Vespucio, s/n. 41092 Seville, Spain)

  • Marián Alonso-González

    (Department of Journalism II, University of Seville, Avda. Américo Vespucio, s/n. 41092 Seville, Spain)

  • Concha Pérez-Curiel

    (Department of Journalism II, University of Seville, Avda. Américo Vespucio, s/n. 41092 Seville, Spain)

Abstract

Natural disasters linked to contexts of unpredictability and surprise generate a climate of uncertainty in the population, resulting in an exponential increase in disinformation. These are crisis situations that cause the management of public and governmental institutions to be questioned, diminish citizens’ trust in the media, and reinforce anonymity in social networks. New digital algorithms create a scenario plagued by fake news and levels of viralization of rumors never before contemplated. Our objective is to analyze the verification capacity of fact-checking agencies at X at times of information disorder, such as the Turkey–Syria earthquakes in 2023. We apply a mixed methodology of comparative content analysis to government, news agency, and IFCN accounts, generating a general sample (n = 46,747) that is then subjected to thematic categorization to create a specific sample (n = 564). The results indicate a low commitment to fact-checking on the part of official bodies and news agencies, as opposed to fact-checking agencies’ accurate handling of the facts. The lack of debate and engagement generated by digital audiences in the face of the discursive intentionality of disinformation is significant.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandra Méndez-Muros & Marián Alonso-González & Concha Pérez-Curiel, 2024. "Disinformation and Fact-Checking in the Face of Natural Disasters: A Case Study on Turkey–Syria Earthquakes," Societies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-29, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:14:y:2024:i:4:p:43-:d:1362701
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/14/4/43/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/14/4/43/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard G. Peters & Vincent T. Covello & David B. McCallum, 1997. "The Determinants of Trust and Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication: An Empirical Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 43-54, February.
    2. Tim Murphy & Murray E. Jennex, 2006. "Knowledge Management and Hurricane Katrina Response," International Journal of Knowledge Management (IJKM), IGI Global Scientific Publishing, vol. 2(4), pages 52-66, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Erik Lin-Greenberg & Theo Milonopoulos, 2021. "Private Eyes in the Sky: Emerging Technology and the Political Consequences of Eroding Government Secrecy," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 65(6), pages 1067-1097, July.
    2. repec:plo:pone00:0211385 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Barbara Lucini, 2025. "Crisis Communication and Governance: Lessons Learned from Covid − 19 Pandemic in Italy," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 27-42, March.
    4. Sean Lonnquist & Deborah Gallagher, 2021. "Use of Fracking Information Disclosure Policies to Reduce Uncertainty in Risk‐Based Decisions," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(3), pages 326-346, May.
    5. O O Ibitayo & K D Pijawka, 1999. "Reversing NIMBY: An Assessment of State Strategies for Siting Hazardous-Waste Facilities," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 17(4), pages 379-389, August.
    6. Craig W. Trumbo & Katherine A. McComas, 2003. "The Function of Credibility in Information Processing for Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 343-353, April.
    7. Michael R. Greenberg & Lynda Osafo, 2000. "Neighborhood quality in environmentally stressed areas of Accra, Ghana: a comparison with US counterparts," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 93-104, June.
    8. Andrew B. Whitford, 2008. "A Test of the Political Control of Bureaucracies Under Asymmetric Information," Rationality and Society, , vol. 20(4), pages 445-470, November.
    9. Nakayachi, Kazuya & Watabe, Motoki, 2005. "Restoring trustworthiness after adverse events: The signaling effects of voluntary "Hostage Posting" on trust," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 1-17, May.
    10. Wouter Poortinga & Nick F. Pidgeon, 2003. "Exploring the Dimensionality of Trust in Risk Regulation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(5), pages 961-972, October.
    11. Kazuya Nakayachi & George Cvetkovich, 2010. "Public Trust in Government Concerning Tobacco Control in Japan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1), pages 143-152, January.
    12. Ian H. Langford & Claire Marris & Annë‐Lise McDonald & Harvey Goldstein & Jon Rasbash & Tim O'Riordan, 1999. "Simultaneous Analysis of Individual and Aggregate Responses in Psychometric Data Using Multilevel Modeling," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 675-683, August.
    13. Francesco De Pascale & Marcello Bernardo & Francesco Muto & Dante Di Matteo & Valeria Dattilo, 2017. "Resilience and seismic risk perception at school: a geoethical experiment in Aiello Calabro, southern Italy," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 86(2), pages 569-586, April.
    14. Melkonyan, Tigran A., 2011. "The Effect of Communicating Ambiguous Risk Information on Choice," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-21, August.
    15. Jean-Philippe BONARDI & Olivier CADOT & Lionel COTTIER, 2016. "Extremists into Truth-tellers: Information Aggregation under Asymmetric Preferences," Working Papers P149, FERDI.
    16. Therese A Joiner & Lynne Leveson & Kim Langfield-Smith, 2002. "Technical Language, Advice Understandability, and Perceptions of Expertise and Trustworthiness: The Case of the Financial Planner," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 27(1), pages 25-43, June.
    17. Wang, Fan & Gu, Jibao & Wu, Jianlin, 2020. "Perspective taking, energy policy involvement, and public acceptance of nuclear energy: Evidence from China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    18. Nick Allum, 2007. "An Empirical Test of Competing Theories of Hazard‐Related Trust: The Case of GM Food," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 935-946, August.
    19. Grace Ibe-enwo & Nicholas Igbudu & Zanete Garanti & Temitope Popoola, 2019. "Assessing the Relevance of Green Banking Practice on Bank Loyalty: The Mediating Effect of Green Image and Bank Trust," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-16, August.
    20. Tianjun Feng & L. Robin Keller & Ping Wu & Yifan Xu, 2014. "An Empirical Study of the Toxic Capsule Crisis in China: Risk Perceptions and Behavioral Responses," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(4), pages 698-710, April.
    21. Cope, S. & Frewer, L.J. & Houghton, J. & Rowe, G. & Fischer, A.R.H. & de Jonge, J., 2010. "Consumer perceptions of best practice in food risk communication and management: Implications for risk analysis policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 349-357, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:14:y:2024:i:4:p:43-:d:1362701. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.