IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/12220.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Facts, Alternative Facts, and Fact Checking in Times of Post-Truth Politics

Author

Listed:
  • Barrera, Oscar
  • Guriev, Sergei
  • Henry, Emeric
  • Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina

Abstract

How persuasive are "alternative facts" i.e., false statements by populist politicians, in convincing voters? How effective is fact checking in countervailing alternative facts? We conduct a randomized online experiment to evaluate the impact of alternative facts and fact checking on knowledge, beliefs, and political preferences of voters in the context of the 2017 French presidential election campaign. Marine Le Pen (MLP), the extreme-right candidate who reached the runoff, regularly used alternative facts in support of her policy proposals, to which mainstream media responded with systematic fact checking. We expose randomly selected subgroups of a sample of 2480 voting-age French to quotes from MLP and/or real facts. The results are as follows. First, alternative facts are highly persuasive. Second, fact checking improves factual knowledge of voters, but does not have an impact on voters' policy conclusions or support for MLP. Third, providing only the true facts backfires by increasing political support for MLP compared to a control group, although to a smaller extent than alternative facts. Finally, heterogeneity of voters with respect to prior voting choices and prior knowledge is important for the effect of treatments on political preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Barrera, Oscar & Guriev, Sergei & Henry, Emeric & Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina, 2017. "Facts, Alternative Facts, and Fact Checking in Times of Post-Truth Politics," CEPR Discussion Papers 12220, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:12220
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=12220
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    alternative facts; elections; fact checking; fake news; voting;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cpr:ceprdp:12220. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.