Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Media manipulation

Media manipulation encompasses the deliberate deployment of deceptive, selective, or psychologically engineered techniques by media producers, political actors, and other influencers to shape public perceptions, behaviors, and beliefs, often subordinating factual integrity to ideological, economic, or power-driven objectives.^[1]^[2] Key methods include framing narratives to emphasize favorable angles while omitting counterevidence, crafting emotionally charged disinformation, and leveraging algorithmic amplification on digital platforms to fabricate consensus or outrage.^[3]^[4] Empirical analyses document how such practices erode democratic discourse by fostering polarized echo chambers and undermining trust in institutions, with social media enabling "industrial-scale" operations by state-sponsored trolls and partisan networks across 81 countries as of 2020.^[3]^[5] In Western mainstream media, systematic left-leaning biases—rooted in the ideological homogeneity of journalists and editorial gatekeepers—manifest as disproportionate scrutiny of conservative figures and policies, alongside amplification of progressive narratives, as evidenced by content analyses of election coverage and policy reporting.^[6]^[7] This institutional skew, distinct from overt fabrication, arises from causal factors like self-selection in hiring and cultural alignment within newsrooms, leading to causal distortions in public understanding of events such as economic reforms or security threats.^[8] Historically, manipulation traces to ancient propaganda but intensified in the 20th century through wartime fabrications, like Allied atrocity exaggerations in World War I pamphlets, and evolved into modern cyber-troop deployments that blend human and automated influence for deniability.^[9]^[10] Notable controversies highlight its dual-edged nature: while ostensibly defensive tools like censorship combat foreign interference, they often enable domestic suppression of dissenting views, prompting debates over regulatory overreach versus free expression.^[11] Countermeasures emphasize media literacy and diverse sourcing, yet persistent empirical gaps in real-time detection underscore the challenge of restoring informational equilibrium.^[12]

Historical Development

Pre-Modern and Early Modern Instances

In ancient Mesopotamia, rulers such as Naram-Sin of Akkad (c. 2254–2218 BCE) employed monumental inscriptions and stelae to exaggerate military victories and divine favor, omitting defeats to legitimize their rule and shape public perception of royal power.^[13] Similarly, Assyrian kings like Ashurbanipal (r. 668–627 BCE) curated library collections and reliefs depicting exaggerated conquests to propagate an image of invincibility, influencing elite and popular views through controlled scribal dissemination.^[14] In ancient Rome, Julius Caesar established the Acta Diurna in 59 BCE as the empire's first daily public gazette, inscribed on tablets and posted in the Forum to broadcast official announcements, trial outcomes, and imperial achievements while suppressing dissenting narratives.^[15] Successor emperors, including Augustus, leveraged this mechanism alongside coinage and monuments—such as the Res Gestae Divi Augusti (c. 14 CE)—to manipulate historical records, portraying themselves as restorers of peace amid civil strife and marginalizing rivals like Mark Antony through selective omissions and biased accounts.^[13]^[14] During the medieval period, the Catholic Church utilized sermons, papal bulls, and chronicles to promote the Crusades, framing them as divinely sanctioned wars against infidels to rally support and justify territorial expansion; Pope Urban II's 1095 Council of Clermont address, for instance, invoked remission of sins to mobilize knights, with subsequent preachers amplifying atrocity stories against Muslims to sustain fervor despite logistical failures.^[16] Epic poems like The Song of Roland (c. 11th century) served as oral and written propaganda, idealizing Christian martyrdom and Saracen treachery to foster anti-Islamic sentiment and bolster feudal loyalty during campaigns such as Charlemagne's purported Spanish expeditions.^[17] The advent of the printing press in the mid-15th century, invented by Johannes Gutenberg around 1440, revolutionized early modern information control by enabling rapid pamphlet production; Martin Luther's 95 Theses (1517) and subsequent tracts, printed in vernacular German, reached over 300,000 copies by 1520, bypassing ecclesiastical censorship to propagate Reformation critiques of indulgences and papal authority.^[18] Catholic authorities countered with their own presses, as in the 1521 papal bull Exsurge Domine condemning Luther, but the technology democratized dissent while monarchs like Henry VIII licensed printers to align outputs with state narratives, such as anti-papal propaganda in England post-1534 Act of Supremacy.^[19] By the 16th century, cities with early presses, like those in the Holy Roman Empire, exhibited 50 percentage points higher Protestant adoption rates by 1600, underscoring printing's role in amplifying ideological manipulation amid religious wars.^[20] Absolute rulers, including French kings from the 1530s, imposed privileges on printers to enforce orthodoxy, transforming the press into a tool for dynastic legitimacy and suppression of seditious texts.^[21]

19th-20th Century Propaganda Machines

The advent of mass-circulation newspapers in the late 19th century enabled early systematic media influence, particularly through yellow journalism in the United States, where publishers Joseph Pulitzer's New York World and William Randolph Hearst's New York Journal engaged in sensationalism, outright fabrications, and exaggerated reporting to drive sales exceeding one million daily copies by 1897. This competition culminated in coverage of the 1898 USS Maine explosion, falsely attributing it to Spain without evidence, which mobilized public outrage and contributed to U.S. entry into the Spanish-American War, demonstrating media's capacity to manufacture consent for conflict.^[22] While primarily profit-motivated, these practices prefigured state propaganda by exploiting emerging technologies like illustrated supplements and telegraphy to amplify narratives unchecked by verification. World War I accelerated the formalization of government propaganda apparatuses, with belligerents establishing centralized bureaus to shape domestic and international opinion amid total mobilization. In Britain, the Wellington House organization, operational from September 1914 under Charles Masterman, disseminated atrocity accounts—such as the Bryce Report's unverified claims of German soldiers bayoneting Belgian children—to recruit over 2.5 million volunteers by 1916 and counter neutralist sentiments in the U.S. These efforts included 12 million leaflets dropped over Germany by 1918, prioritizing emotional appeals over factual accuracy to sustain wartime unity. In the U.S., President Woodrow Wilson's Executive Order 2594 created the Committee on Public Information (CPI) on April 13, 1917, under journalist George Creel, which produced 75 million pamphlets, 6,000 reel newsreels, and 16,000 slide lectures viewed by 60 million Americans, framing the war as a crusade against Prussian autocracy while suppressing dissent via voluntary press censorship.^[23] The CPI's Division of News coordinated 20,000 column inches of daily pro-war articles, transforming journalism toward government-aligned narratives.^[24] Interwar totalitarian regimes refined propaganda into comprehensive state machines integrating all media under ideological monopoly. In the Soviet Union, the Bolsheviks formalized agitation-propaganda (Agitprop) structures within the Communist Party's Central Committee by 1920, directing outlets like Pravda—which reached 1.5 million subscribers by 1940—and mobilizing 70,000 agitators for literacy campaigns and factory talks to enforce Marxist-Leninist orthodoxy, glorifying Five-Year Plans despite famines killing millions in 1932-1933.^[25] This apparatus, evolving into the Department of Agitation and Propaganda, censored alternatives and fabricated successes, such as claiming 100% industrial fulfillment quotas amid widespread shortages.^[26] In Nazi Germany, Adolf Hitler appointed Joseph Goebbels as Reich Minister for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda on March 13, 1933, consolidating control over radio (reaching 70% of households by 1939 via cheap "People's Receivers"), film, and press through the Reich Chamber of Culture, which licensed 2,500 publications and expelled 1,500 journalists by 1935.^[27] Goebbels' office orchestrated events like the 1935 Nuremberg Rally, attended by 300,000, using synchronized media to instill Führer worship and dehumanize Jews as existential threats, with films like The Eternal Jew (1940) viewed by millions to justify escalating persecution.^[28] World War II extended these models, with Axis and Allied powers deploying propaganda on unprecedented scales; Nazi efforts peaked with 1,400 daily newspapers under party oversight, while U.S. Office of War Information output included 200,000 radio broadcasts and posters seen by 90% of the population, emphasizing production quotas met through Rosie the Riveter campaigns that drew 6 million women into factories.^[29] Postwar, Cold War continuations like Radio Free Europe—broadcasting to Eastern Bloc audiences from 1949—countered Soviet machines, which by 1950 controlled 80% of global communist media output, highlighting propaganda's role in ideological proxy conflicts without direct confrontation.^[30] These 19th- and 20th-century developments institutionalized media as extensions of state power, prioritizing narrative control over empirical reporting and setting precedents for mass psychological operations.

Digital Era Evolution (Late 20th Century to Present)

The introduction of the internet in the late 1980s and the World Wide Web in 1991 facilitated novel forms of media manipulation by enabling low-cost, anonymous dissemination of fabricated content. Early instances included viral email chain hoaxes in the 1990s, such as urban legends and conspiracy theories that spread rapidly without traditional gatekeepers, prefiguring modern misinformation campaigns.^[31] These developments paralleled the commercialization of online spaces, where spam and rudimentary phishing tactics emerged to exploit user trust for financial gain. The 2000s saw the proliferation of Web 2.0 platforms, including Facebook (2004), YouTube (2005), and Twitter (2006), which democratized content creation but amplified manipulative techniques through user-driven sharing and algorithmic recommendations. Personalized feeds, designed to maximize engagement, created echo chambers by prioritizing content aligning with users' past interactions, reinforcing confirmation bias and segregating audiences into ideologically homogeneous groups.^[32] This infrastructure enabled microtargeting, as exemplified by Cambridge Analytica's harvesting of 87 million Facebook profiles in 2014-2016 to deliver tailored political ads influencing voter behavior.^[33] The 2016 U.S. presidential election highlighted the scale of digital manipulation, with fake news stories generating 30 million more shares on Facebook than comparable legitimate articles from March to November 2016, disproportionately favoring Donald Trump. Peer-reviewed analyses found that while only 1.4% of Americans' Facebook diets consisted of fake news, pro-Trump falsehoods like the "Pizzagate" conspiracy reached millions, correlating with shifts in voting intentions in key states. Foreign actors, including Russia's Internet Research Agency, operated troll farms producing divisive content that garnered 126 million impressions on Facebook alone.^[33] ^[34] Similar tactics influenced Brexit and other elections, underscoring algorithms' role in prioritizing sensationalism over veracity.^[35] Advancements in artificial intelligence since the mid-2010s have intensified manipulation through generative tools and deepfakes, with the first notable deepfake video appearing in 2017 via Reddit-shared face-swapping software. By 2023, deepfake incidents surged 550% since 2019, enabling hyper-realistic fabrications of political figures—such as fabricated speeches by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in 2022—to sow discord and erode trust in audiovisual evidence.^[36] State and non-state actors increasingly deploy AI for scalable propaganda, including bot networks amplifying narratives, while platforms' detection efforts lag amid evolving techniques.^[37] This progression reflects a shift from overt falsehoods to subtle, data-driven influence operations exploiting human psychology and technological opacity.^[38]

Conceptual Foundations

Core Definitions and Principles

Media manipulation constitutes the deliberate employment of mass media channels to influence public opinion through psychological tactics, advertising methods, and selective presentation of information, often employing images, language, and sound to evoke emotions and guide perceptions toward predetermined outcomes.^[1] This process exploits the structural features of media ecosystems—technical, social, economic, and institutional—to distort narratives, amplify discord, or undermine institutional stability.^[5] At its core, it involves altering media artifacts, such as text, images, or videos, through artful or unfair means to advance specific agendas, distinguishing it from inadvertent errors by requiring coordinated intent.^[39] Fundamental principles of media manipulation hinge on intentional deception and the leveraging of human cognitive limitations, such as susceptibility to emotional appeals and confirmation biases, to bypass critical evaluation.^[1] A key operational principle is the lifecycle of manipulation, which progresses from planning and initial seeding of content (e.g., via blogs or forums) to adaptation in response to platform moderations or journalistic scrutiny, enabling sustained influence despite countermeasures.^[39] Causally, effectiveness derives from scalability: manipulators game algorithms for amplification, deploy automated tools like bots for volume, or coordinate human networks (e.g., troll armies) to simulate organic consensus, thereby altering information flows and public discourse dynamics.^[5] Central techniques embody principles of selectivity and fabrication, including omission of contradictory data, exaggeration of narratives, and scapegoating to divert attention from systemic issues.^[1] For instance, governments have applied diversion tactics, such as promoting trivial distractions, alongside delayed timelines for unpopular policies to mitigate immediate backlash.^[1] These principles operate on the premise that repeated exposure to framed content primes audiences to accept distorted realities, as seen in historical precedents like the 1964 U.S. "Daisy" advertisement, which linked an opponent to nuclear annihilation through emotive imagery without direct evidence.^[1] Empirical observation confirms that such methods thrive in low-trust environments, where source credibility erodes, allowing manipulators to exploit asymmetries in information access and verification costs.^[40]

Distinctions from Bias, Propaganda, and Disinformation

Media manipulation entails the deliberate exploitation of media platforms' structural features—such as algorithmic amplification or audience engagement metrics—by motivated actors to shape public perceptions through coordinated tactics, including the deployment of bots, troll networks, or fabricated narratives.^[5]^[12] This process differs from media bias, which generally reflects an inherent, often unintentional skew in coverage stemming from journalists' or outlets' ideological predispositions, leading to selective emphasis on facts that align with preconceived views without orchestrated deceit.^[41] For example, a news organization with a consistent pattern of underreporting certain policy failures due to shared worldview constitutes bias, whereas manipulation might involve purchasing fake endorsements or engineering viral falsehoods to simulate grassroots support.^[5] In contrast to propaganda, which systematically promotes a partisan agenda through emotive framing of potentially accurate information to mobilize support— as seen in state-sponsored campaigns during wartime—media manipulation prioritizes outcome-driven distortion over ideological consistency, often blending true and false elements via platform-specific hacks like hashtag hijacking or coordinated inauthentic behavior.^[42]^[3] Propaganda typically builds narratives over extended periods to foster loyalty, such as historical examples of regime glorification in Soviet media, while manipulation leverages ephemeral digital tools for rapid, scalable influence without requiring long-term coherence.^[41] Disinformation represents a targeted tool within manipulation's arsenal, defined as verifiably false content intentionally disseminated to deceive audiences, distinguishing it from mere errors or unintentional falsehoods (misinformation).^[43] Manipulation surpasses disinformation by integrating it into broader sociotechnical strategies, such as amplifying lies through paid influencers or algorithmic gaming, rather than standalone fabrication; for instance, disinformation might entail a single doctored video, but manipulation orchestrates its spread across networks to embed it in information ecosystems.^[5] These boundaries, while overlapping in practice, underscore manipulation's emphasis on systemic leverage over isolated intent or slant.^[12]

Actors and Motivations

State and Governmental Entities

State and governmental entities represent primary actors in media manipulation, leveraging control over information flows to secure political dominance, foster national unity, and advance strategic objectives. These actors operate through state-owned broadcasters, regulatory frameworks, and covert operations, driven by motivations such as regime preservation, ideological indoctrination, and geopolitical influence. Empirical evidence indicates that such manipulation spans regime types, though it manifests more overtly in authoritarian systems where media serves as an extension of state apparatus.^[3]^[44] In authoritarian contexts, governments maintain comprehensive oversight of media to suppress dissent and propagate official narratives. China's Chinese Communist Party enforces stringent control over both state-run outlets like Xinhua and nominally private media, utilizing the Great Firewall to block foreign content and mandate alignment with party directives, thereby shaping domestic perceptions of economic achievements and territorial claims.^[45] Similarly, North Korea's regime dictates all media output through entities like the Korean Central News Agency, prohibiting independent journalism and enforcing content that glorifies the leadership, with access to foreign media punishable by severe penalties.^[44] Russia's government, via state channels such as RT, conducts disinformation operations to undermine adversaries, as seen in coordinated efforts during the 2016 U.S. election to amplify divisive narratives through troll farms and hacked materials.^[46] These actions stem from incentives to consolidate power and neutralize opposition, where unchecked media could erode elite control.^[47] Democratic governments, while generally eschewing outright ownership, engage in subtler forms of influence tied to national security and policy consensus. During World War I, the U.S. Committee on Public Information produced millions of posters and films to boost enlistment and bond sales, framing the war as a moral crusade against autocracy.^[48] Contemporary examples include regulatory pressures and funding incentives that align public broadcasters with government priorities, alongside wartime or crisis-era narratives that prioritize unity over scrutiny. A 2021 Oxford Internet Institute analysis documented government-backed social media manipulation in every one of 81 countries studied, including democracies, often to sway elections or public opinion on foreign policy.^[3] Such efforts reflect causal incentives for leaders to manufacture consent for costly policies, though institutional checks like free speech protections limit their scope compared to autocracies.^[10]

Corporate and Commercial Players

Corporate entities manipulate media primarily to enhance profitability, leveraging sensational content and algorithmic designs that prioritize user engagement over factual accuracy. News organizations, driven by advertising revenue models, employ clickbait headlines and exaggerated narratives to boost traffic and clicks, as online-native outlets demonstrate higher use of sensational features compared to legacy media.^[49] This practice stems from business imperatives where page views directly correlate with ad earnings, often leading to distorted representations of events to exploit emotional responses.^[50] Social media platforms amplify this through algorithms optimized for metrics like likes, shares, and time spent, which favor divisive or outrage-inducing content to sustain user retention and facilitate targeted advertising.^[51] For instance, platforms such as Facebook and YouTube have been documented to promote anger-driven posts, creating feedback loops that escalate engagement at the expense of balanced discourse, directly contributing to revenue from prolonged user interaction.^[52] These systems, engineered for commercial gain, inadvertently or deliberately manipulate information flows by surface-prioritizing viral material, regardless of veracity. Corporate ownership further influences content by aligning editorial choices with advertiser interests or parent company agendas, suppressing critical coverage of business partners to safeguard revenue streams. Historical cases include media conglomerates avoiding scrutiny of sponsors like Monsanto or Chiquita, where favorable narratives preserved advertising dollars.^[53] In contemporary examples, concentrated ownership reduces viewpoint diversity, fostering self-censorship and bias toward profit-protecting omissions, as seen in limited investigative reporting on corporate malfeasance.^[54] Such manipulations prioritize financial outcomes, eroding journalistic independence and public trust in media as a truth-conveying institution.

Ideological and Activist Groups

Ideological and activist groups engage in media manipulation to advance partisan agendas, often by coordinating narratives, staging events for publicity, or selectively editing content to portray opponents negatively while amplifying supportive frames. These entities, distinct from state or corporate actors, leverage grassroots appearances or digital amplification to simulate broad public consensus, a tactic known as astroturfing, where funded campaigns mimic organic activism.^[55] Such efforts exploit media's reliance on visual drama and emotional appeals, influencing coverage through pressure, leaks, or fabricated scenarios, with empirical studies showing coordinated online activity from ideological networks can distort public discourse on issues like elections or social justice.^[56] Conservative activist organizations like Project Veritas, founded in 2010 by James O'Keefe, have conducted undercover sting operations using hidden cameras and edited footage to expose perceived biases in left-leaning institutions. For instance, in 2016, videos released by the group purported to capture Democratic operatives discussing voter fraud tactics, prompting widespread media scrutiny despite later fact-checks revealing contextual omissions in the edits.^[57] Similarly, earlier 2009-2010 videos targeting ACORN led to the organization's defunding, though investigations by California and other authorities cleared ACORN staff of illegality, attributing discrepancies to selective splicing that misrepresented conversations.^[58] Project Veritas' methods, including coordination with legal advisors to test deception limits, illustrate how ideological groups blur journalism and activism to shape narratives, often facing lawsuits for misrepresentation.^[59] On the environmental front, Greenpeace has orchestrated high-profile stunts to manipulate media attention toward anti-corporate campaigns. In June 2012, the group launched a hoax against Shell's Arctic drilling plans, deploying activists in fake polar bear suits to disrupt events and circulating fabricated ads via social media and protests, generating over 1 million online views and forcing media outlets to cover the spectacle before revealing the deception.^[60] This tactic, rooted in founder Bob Hunter's "media mind bomb" concept from the 1970s, prioritizes visual disruption over factual precision, as seen in the 2014 Nazca Lines incident where activists trampled protected Peruvian geoglyphs to protest climate inaction, damaging the UNESCO site and drawing global headlines despite official condemnations.^[61]^[62] Progressive activist networks, including those aligned with Black Lives Matter (BLM), have influenced media framing of racial justice issues through narrative control and amplification of selective incidents. A 2020-2022 analysis of BLM-related coverage found media distortion in portraying protests, with outlets emphasizing "controlling images" of Black criminality to undermine movement legitimacy, yet activist coordination via social media—such as timed hashtag campaigns—sustained favorable frames on police shootings, mobilizing over 118 million tweets in two years.^[63]^[64] Groups like Media Matters for America, established in 2004, monitor and critique conservative media, but have been accused of analogous selective editing to discredit opponents, mirroring tactics they decry in others.^[65] These efforts highlight a pattern where left-leaning ideological NGOs, bolstered by institutional ties, exert disproportionate influence on narratives, often prioritizing ideological purity over comprehensive evidence, as evidenced by coordinated astroturfing in advocacy coalitions.^[66] Across the spectrum, such manipulations erode trust when exposed, with studies indicating astroturfed campaigns from ideological fronts—funded covertly—foster cynicism, as seen in U.S. cases where NGOs simulate citizen outrage to sway policy debates on energy or immigration.^[67] Empirical data from global inventories reveal that non-state ideological actors increasingly deploy bots and sockpuppets alongside traditional stunts, amplifying reach but risking backlash when authenticity unravels.^[68]

Techniques and Methods

Traditional Media Framing and Omission

Framing in traditional media involves the strategic selection and emphasis of particular aspects of a perceived reality to shape audience interpretation, often through choices in language, sourcing, and narrative structure.^[69] This technique, rooted in cognitive psychology, makes certain problem definitions, causal attributions, or solutions more salient while de-emphasizing others, thereby influencing public opinion without overt distortion.^[70] Empirical content analyses of newspapers and broadcast news have quantified framing effects, showing consistent patterns where economic stories, for instance, are framed around "human interest" or "conflict" angles over 60% of the time in major U.S. outlets from 1990 to 2010.^[71] Omission complements framing by excluding relevant facts, viewpoints, or contexts that could alter the story's implications, functioning as a subtle form of selection bias.^[72] In traditional journalism, this manifests as underreporting of events contradicting editorial leanings, such as the disproportionate omission of positive economic indicators during administrations opposed by outlet audiences.^[73] A systematic review of bias detection methods identified omission as one of seven core bias types, prevalent in 20-30% of analyzed articles across print and TV, where stories ignore counter-evidence like alternative data sources or stakeholder perspectives.^[72]^[74] Case studies illustrate these mechanisms' interplay. In scientific reporting, a 2022 examination of 50 health studies in U.S. and U.K. newspapers found that 68% omitted methodological limitations or risks, framing results as unequivocally positive to align with audience expectations for breakthroughs, despite peer-reviewed evidence of qualifiers in original papers.^[75] Similarly, coverage of indigenous issues in Canadian media from 2010-2020 revealed systematic omission of Native perspectives in resource development stories, reducing mentions by up to 80% compared to official government sources, which perpetuated narratives of inevitable progress over conflict.^[76] Empirical surveys of media bias confirm framing and omission's directional slant, with U.S. outlets like The New York Times and CNN scoring left-leaning on citation indices from 1993-2002, citing liberal think tanks 10 times more frequently than conservative ones, while omitting or minimally framing opposing data on issues like welfare reform outcomes.^[73] This pattern persists, as a 2024 review of 3,140 papers noted framing's role in amplifying ideological echo chambers through selective attribution, where blame or causality is assigned via omitted context, affecting policy debates on topics like immigration enforcement.^[74] Such practices erode source credibility when exposed, as audiences detect inconsistencies through cross-verification, though initial exposure solidifies skewed perceptions.^[77]

Visual, Audio, and Content Fabrication

Visual, audio, and content fabrication in media manipulation refers to the creation of synthetic or altered media designed to mimic reality and deceive viewers or listeners, often leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) or digital editing tools. Deepfakes, a prominent technique, employ generative adversarial networks (GANs) and other deep learning algorithms to produce hyper-realistic videos by swapping faces, altering expressions, or synchronizing lip movements with fabricated speech.^[78]^[79] Audio fabrication similarly uses voice cloning models trained on short samples to generate synthetic speech indistinguishable from the original speaker.^[80] These methods enable the production of entirely fabricated content, such as videos depicting non-existent events or statements, surpassing traditional editing like Photoshop manipulation of still images, which duplicates or erases elements to alter narratives.^[81]^[82] Proliferation of these technologies has accelerated, with an estimated 500,000 deepfakes shared on social media in 2023, projected to reach 8 million by 2025 due to accessible AI tools.^[83] In political contexts, fabrication serves to undermine elections; for instance, in January 2024, a deepfake audio impersonating U.S. President Joe Biden was distributed via robocalls to over 5,000 New Hampshire Democratic primary voters, urging them to skip the election and save their votes for November.^[80] The audio, generated using ElevenLabs software from a 4-second sample, prompted the Federal Communications Commission to fine the perpetrator $6 million and propose bans on AI-generated voices in robocalls and political ads.^[80] Similarly, days before Slovakia's 2023 parliamentary election, a deepfake audio clip depicted progressive candidate Michal Šimečka discussing election rigging with another figure, contributing to the opposition's narrow defeat amid voter distrust.^[84] Visual fabrications extend to static images and videos; in March 2023, AI-generated images falsely depicting Pope Francis in a white puffer jacket circulated widely on social media, garnering millions of views before Midjourney's watermarking exposed the fabrication.^[85] During Taiwan's 2024 presidential election, deepfake videos targeted candidates and military personnel, including fabricated clips of politicians making inflammatory statements to incite division, as part of broader interference attributed to foreign actors.^[86] Content fabrication also manifests in hybrid forms, such as "cheapfakes"—less sophisticated edits of real footage sped up or slowed to mislead, like a 2024 video of U.S. President Biden appearing disoriented, contrasted with AI-driven deepfakes that create seamless illusions.^[87] These techniques exploit human perceptual biases, where viewers trust audiovisual cues as empirical evidence, facilitating rapid dissemination via platforms with minimal verification.^[37] Detection challenges persist, as advanced deepfakes evade traditional forensics like pixel inconsistencies, necessitating AI countermeasures analyzing micro-expressions or audio spectrograms.^[88] Empirical studies indicate that while political deepfakes can influence perceptions—e.g., reducing trust in targeted figures by 20-30% in controlled experiments—their broader electoral impact remains limited without corroborating narratives, though they amplify polarization.^[89]^[90] Fabrication's causal role in manipulation stems from its ability to fabricate causal claims, such as attributing false actions to leaders, eroding evidentiary standards in public discourse.^[91] Regulatory responses, including 2024 legislation in over 10 U.S. states prohibiting deceptive deepfakes in elections, highlight growing recognition of these tools' threat to informational integrity.^[92]

Digital Network Exploitation and Automation

Digital network exploitation involves the coordinated use of automated tools and networks to manipulate information flows on online platforms, often through botnets—clusters of software-controlled accounts that simulate human activity to amplify narratives or suppress opposing views. These systems leverage scripting languages and APIs to generate posts, likes, shares, and comments at scale, creating artificial trends that influence algorithmic recommendations. Empirical studies indicate that bots can accelerate the spread of targeted content by factors of up to six times compared to organic human posting, as observed in analyses of Twitter data during political events.^[93] Automation techniques include cyborg accounts—partially human-operated with algorithmic assistance—and fully autonomous bots programmed for tasks like hashtag hijacking or astroturfing, where fabricated grassroots support mimics genuine public sentiment. Coordinated inauthentic behavior, such as synchronized posting from thousands of accounts, exploits platform algorithms designed to prioritize engagement metrics like virality over veracity, thereby embedding manipulative content into users' feeds. For instance, during the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the Internet Research Agency operated over 3,500 automated accounts that generated millions of interactions, promoting divisive themes to erode trust in electoral processes, as detailed in declassified U.S. intelligence assessments.^[3]^[94] Exploitation extends to algorithmic vulnerabilities, where manipulators game recommendation systems by inflating engagement signals, leading to disproportionate visibility for low-quality or false information. Research on Twitter's algorithms across multiple countries found consistent amplification of politically aligned content, with right-leaning material receiving higher boosts in six of seven nations studied, potentially due to network structures favoring high-engagement clusters. State actors, such as those linked to Russia's Project Lakhta, have deployed bot farms to target elections, including the 2020 U.S. cycle where automated networks disseminated claims about voter fraud, reaching tens of millions of impressions before platform interventions.^[95]^[96] Advanced automation now incorporates machine learning for adaptive behaviors, evading detection by varying posting patterns and incorporating human-like errors. Commercial tools, including bot-as-a-service platforms, enable non-state actors to rent networks of up to 100,000 accounts for campaigns costing as little as $0.01 per interaction, democratizing access to these methods while complicating attribution. Detection challenges persist, as platforms like Meta and X (formerly Twitter) rely on heuristics that flag only about 20-30% of sophisticated operations, per independent audits, underscoring the scalability and persistence of this form of manipulation.^[97]^[98]

Cognitive and Behavioral Manipulation

Cognitive manipulation in media entails exploiting inherent psychological vulnerabilities to shape perceptions and beliefs, often through repetitive exposure or selective reinforcement of information. The illusory truth effect, whereby repeated statements are perceived as more truthful regardless of their veracity, exemplifies this technique; experimental evidence demonstrates that repetition increases belief in false claims, with effects persisting even after corrections.^[99] This mechanism underpins propaganda strategies, as familiarity breeds acceptance, amplifying misinformation when disseminated across outlets.^[100] Confirmation bias further facilitates such manipulation, as media entities curate content aligning with audience predispositions, reinforcing echo chambers that distort objective assessment.^[101] Behavioral manipulation extends these cognitive influences to prompt specific actions, leveraging emotional triggers and environmental cues in media presentation. Negativity bias, a cognitive tendency to prioritize adverse information, is harnessed in news coverage to heighten engagement and sway decisions, with studies indicating that negative headlines elicit stronger physiological responses and alter social judgments independently of factual content.^[102]^[103] In digital contexts, nudges such as prominent article positioning or labeling influence news selection, guiding user behavior without overt coercion; a 2024 experiment found that interface nudges significantly shifted reader choices toward certain topics, demonstrating predictable alterations in consumption patterns.^[104] Short exposures to fabricated news, under five minutes, have been shown to modify unconscious behaviors, underscoring media's capacity to drive actions via subtle psychological levers.^[105] These techniques converge in algorithmic amplification on social platforms, where engagement optimization exploits tribalism and fear to polarize users, fostering behaviors like rapid sharing of unverified claims.^[106] Empirical analyses reveal that such manipulations erode critical evaluation, with repeated low-credibility content gaining traction through cognitive shortcuts, ultimately influencing collective actions such as protest participation or voting patterns.^[107] While peer-reviewed research validates these effects, applications in partisan media warrant scrutiny for intentional bias, as outlets may prioritize ideological alignment over empirical fidelity.^[108]

Case Studies and Empirical Examples

Wartime and Cold War Manipulations

During World War I, the United States established the Committee on Public Information (CPI) under George Creel in April 1917 to mobilize public support for the war effort through systematic media campaigns.^[109] The CPI produced over 75 million pamphlets, deployed 75,000 "Four Minute Men" volunteers for short speeches in public venues, and distributed films and posters depicting German forces as barbaric, including unsubstantiated claims of atrocities like the "corpse factory" myth alleging Germans rendered human bodies into soap and lubricants.^[109] ^[110] These efforts suppressed dissent by framing opposition as unpatriotic, contributing to vigilante actions against suspected German sympathizers, with over 1,000 arrests and widespread censorship of newspapers.^[109] British propaganda in the same war emphasized atrocity stories to justify intervention, notably the 1915 Bryce Report claiming widespread German rapes and mutilations in Belgium, which included unverified accounts later admitted to contain fabrications to evoke outrage and boost recruitment.^[111] Approximately 6,500 civilians were killed in Belgium and northern France in 1914, but propaganda amplified these into systematic horrors, influencing neutral U.S. opinion through pamphlets distributed by figures like Viscount Bryce.^[112] In World War II, Nazi Germany centralized media control under Joseph Goebbels' Ministry of Propaganda from 1933, manipulating radio, film, and press to foster racial ideology and war enthusiasm.^[113] The 1935 film Triumph of the Will glorified Hitler, while outlets like Der Stürmer disseminated anti-Semitic caricatures portraying Jews as subhuman threats, reaching millions via mandatory radio ownership drives that equipped 70% of households by 1939.^[114] This orchestration suppressed factual reporting on military setbacks, such as the 1943 Stalingrad defeat, by censoring dissent and fabricating victories to maintain morale.^[115] The Cold War saw U.S. efforts to counter Soviet influence through covert media operations, including CIA funding of Radio Free Europe (RFE), launched in 1950 to broadcast uncensored news into Eastern Europe, initially disguised as émigré-funded to evade accusations of propaganda.^[116] RFE reached an estimated 25 million listeners by the 1980s, airing reports on Soviet gulags and economic failures, but jammed by communist regimes; declassified records confirm CIA orchestration until 1971 to shape narratives against communism.^[117] Operation Mockingbird, a CIA program from the 1950s to 1970s, involved recruiting over 400 American journalists and influencing outlets like The New York Times and CBS to plant favorable stories on U.S. foreign policy, as revealed in 1977 congressional hearings documenting agency payments and editorial guidance.^[118] This extended to fabricating reports on events like the 1953 Iranian coup to justify interventions.^[119] Soviet disinformation, via KGB "active measures" from the 1920s peaking in the 1970s-1980s, deployed forgeries and rumors to undermine Western alliances, such as the 1979 "KGB letter" falsely attributing U.S. AIDS research to Fort Detrick as biowarfare.^[120] The KGB influenced 20-30 foreign media assets annually, spreading claims like NATO planning chemical attacks, with operations like Operation INFEKTION disseminating 200 articles across 25 countries by 1985 to erode trust in U.S. institutions.^[121] These tactics prioritized deception over truth, exploiting media amplification without regard for verifiability.^[122]

Electoral and Political Campaigns (1990s-2020s)

In the 1990s, U.S. presidential campaigns began integrating early digital tools alongside traditional media framing, with Bill Clinton's 1996 reelection effort pioneering website usage for voter outreach, though manipulation primarily involved selective omission in broadcast coverage of scandals like Whitewater.^[123] Cable news expansion, including Fox News's 1996 launch, introduced competitive framing that challenged dominant narratives, but mainstream outlets often prioritized horse-race analysis over substantive policy scrutiny, comprising up to 15% of election-year news.^[124] The 2000s saw heightened metacoverage of media processes in U.S. and UK elections, where framing emphasized candidate authenticity and publicity strategies, as in George W. Bush's 2000 campaign visuals portraying decisiveness amid the Florida recount.^[125] Microtargeting evolved through voter data analytics, enabling tailored messaging, though empirical evidence of decisive impact remained limited until social media's rise.^[126] In the UK, 2005 general election coverage highlighted similar mediatization trends, with parties adapting to web-based campaigning for direct voter appeals.^[127] The 2016 U.S. election featured Cambridge Analytica's psychographic targeting for the Trump campaign, harvesting Facebook data from up to 87 million users to deliver personalized ads, yet studies question its electoral sway, attributing Trump's victory more to broader turnout dynamics than microtargeting efficacy.^[128]^[129] The Brexit referendum similarly involved bots amplifying pro-Leave messages on Twitter, artificially boosting sentiment in #Brexit discussions, alongside misleading claims from both sides on economic impacts like NHS funding.^[130]^[131] Mainstream media's disproportionate negativity toward Leave and Trump campaigns, per content analyses, reflected framing biases favoring establishment positions.^[132] By the 2020 U.S. election, suppression tactics emerged prominently, as platforms like Facebook and Twitter throttled the New York Post's October 2020 Hunter Biden laptop story—verified via forensic analysis as authentic—following FBI warnings about potential foreign disinformation, despite internal doubts.^[133]^[134] Mainstream outlets initially labeled it Russian disinformation, delaying coverage until post-election authentication, with polls indicating 79% of respondents believed fuller disclosure could have altered outcomes by swaying undecided voters.^[135] This selective omission, echoed in prior cycles' handling of Clinton emails, underscored causal risks of coordinated censorship eroding voter information symmetry.^[136]

Recent AI-Driven Instances (2023-2025)

In late September 2023, ahead of Slovakia's parliamentary election on September 30, an AI-generated audio deepfake impersonating opposition candidate Michal Šimečka surfaced on Telegram and Facebook, falsely portraying him admitting to planning election fraud with the aim of discrediting anti-corruption progressive parties.^[137]^[138] The clip, produced via accessible text-to-speech tools, was amplified by pro-Russian accounts and viewed over 100,000 times within hours, though fact-checkers quickly debunked it; its role in contributing to the victory of populist candidate Peter Pellegrini remains contested, with analyses suggesting limited swing influence amid broader disinformation efforts.^[137]^[138] On January 21, 2024, New Hampshire voters received thousands of robocalls featuring an AI-synthesized voice mimicking President Joe Biden, advising recipients to "save their vote for November" and skip the Democratic primary the next day.^[139]^[140] The calls, orchestrated by Texas consultant Steve Kramer using an open-source voice-cloning service, reached approximately 5,000 Democrats and prompted immediate investigations by state authorities and the FCC, which later imposed a $6 million fine on Kramer in September 2024 for violating robocall rules and interfering in the election.^[141]^[139] A telecom firm involved, Lingo Telecom, agreed to a $1 million penalty in August 2024, underscoring vulnerabilities in AI audio fabrication that required minimal resources—estimated at under $1,000 to produce.^[142] During India's 2024 general elections from April to June, AI deepfakes proliferated across social media, including manipulated videos of Prime Minister Narendra Modi dancing or delivering false speeches, AI-generated avatars of deceased politicians like Muthuvel Karunanidhi addressing rallies, and altered images of opposition leaders such as Rahul Gandhi superimposed into compromising scenarios.^[143]^[144] Both ruling BJP and opposition parties deployed generative AI for campaign content, with over 30 documented deepfake videos analyzed by fact-checkers, exacerbating communal tensions through fabricated ethnic violence footage; India's Deepfakes Analysis Unit under the Press Information Bureau flagged hundreds of instances, leading to content removals but highlighting enforcement challenges in a electorate of nearly 1 billion.^[145]^[146] Russian state-linked actors intensified AI use for disinformation in 2024, including a DOJ-disrupted bot farm operation uncovered in September that employed generative AI to automate thousands of fake social media accounts mimicking U.S. users, spreading polarizing narratives on the presidential election via cloned websites and AI-crafted articles posing as American news outlets.^[147]^[148] Tactics involved free AI tools for creating synthetic images, QR codes linking to malware-laden sites, and narrative amplification on platforms like X and Telegram, with campaigns targeting immigration and Ukraine aid debates; U.S. intelligence attributed over 100 such domains to the "Doppelganger" network, which evaded detection by mimicking legitimate traffic patterns.^[149]^[150] Despite these efforts, empirical reviews of 2024 global elections, including U.S. and EU cases, found AI content's viral reach often overstated, with traditional misinformation dominating influence, though detection lags persist.^[144]^[151]

Societal and Psychological Impacts

Erosion of Public Trust and Polarization

Public trust in mainstream media institutions has declined precipitously over recent decades, reaching a record low of 28% in 2025 according to Gallup polling, marking the first time this measure fell below 30% since tracking began in the 1970s.^[152] This erosion correlates with documented instances of media manipulation, including selective framing, omission of countervailing facts, and amplification of unverified narratives, which foster perceptions of systemic bias and undermine confidence in reporting accuracy.^[153] Empirical studies indicate that exposure to higher rates of false or misleading content directly reduces trust in news outlets, as audiences increasingly detect discrepancies between reported events and personal observations or alternative sources.^[154] Partisan divides exacerbate this trend, with Republicans expressing only 12% trust in media as of 2024 Gallup data, compared to 54% among Democrats, reflecting asymmetric perceptions of ideological slant in coverage.^[155] Mainstream outlets, often critiqued for left-leaning biases in story selection and framing—such as disproportionate emphasis on certain social issues while downplaying others—have alienated conservative audiences, prompting reliance on alternative platforms and further entrenching skepticism.^[156] This distrust manifests causally through repeated exposures to manipulative techniques like agenda-setting via omission, where key contextual details are withheld to shape narratives, leading to widespread belief that media prioritizes advocacy over factual reporting.^[157] Concurrently, media manipulation intensifies political polarization by incentivizing selective exposure, where individuals gravitate toward outlets aligning with preexisting views, amplified by algorithmic curation on digital platforms.^[158] Pew Research data from 2023-2025 reveals stark partisan disagreements on trusted sources, with Republicans largely eschewing public broadcasters like NPR (distrusted by over twice as many as trust it) while Democrats overwhelmingly endorse them, creating echo chambers that reinforce divergent realities.^[159] Studies confirm that partisan media consumption heightens affective polarization, with biased coverage of events like elections or policy debates widening perceptual gaps on issues such as economic conditions or immigration, as audiences interpret the same facts through manipulated lenses.^[160] This dynamic not only sustains division but also hampers cross-ideological dialogue, as manipulated content erodes the shared factual baseline essential for civic cohesion.^[161]

Consequences for Policy and Decision-Making

Media manipulation distorts the informational inputs for policymakers, often prioritizing sensational or ideologically aligned narratives over verifiable data, which can lead to decisions miscalibrated to actual risks and trade-offs. By shaping public opinion through framing, omission, and amplification, media influences electoral pressures and perceived mandates, compelling governments to enact policies that align with manufactured consensus rather than empirical evidence. Studies indicate that such dynamics contribute to inefficient regulatory outcomes, as seen in cases where media-driven public sentiment overrides cost-benefit analyses in resource allocation.^[162]^[163] In the prelude to the 2003 Iraq invasion, mainstream U.S. media outlets largely echoed administration claims on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) with limited independent verification, fostering beliefs that 69% of Americans held by early 2003 that Iraq likely possessed WMDs capable of being deployed within 45 minutes. This coverage built public support peaking at 72% approval for military action, directly informing congressional authorization on October 10, 2002, and the war's launch on March 20, 2003. The absence of WMDs post-invasion underscored how uncritical amplification led to a policy yielding 4,537 U.S. military deaths, over 200,000 Iraqi civilian fatalities, and U.S. budgetary costs surpassing $2 trillion by 2023, with long-term veteran care adding trillions more.^[164]^[165]^[166] During the COVID-19 pandemic, media emphasis on exponential case growth and dire projections, often sidelining early data on age-stratified risks or lockdown externalities, propelled adoption of nationwide restrictions beginning March 2020 in the U.S. and similar measures globally. This narrative environment correlated with sustained public backing for policies amid coverage that underrepresented critiques of overreach, contributing to a 3.4% U.S. GDP contraction in 2020 and estimated global economic losses exceeding $10 trillion by 2021, including disrupted supply chains and elevated non-COVID mortality from deferred care. Empirical assessments later revealed that while initial measures curbed spread, prolonged implementations yielded marginal health gains relative to disproportionate socioeconomic harms, highlighting how media-sustained alarmism delayed pivots to focused protections for vulnerable groups.^[167]^[168]^[169]

Biases, Controversies, and Critiques

Empirical Evidence of Ideological Slants in Mainstream Media

Numerous surveys of U.S. journalists reveal a disproportionate identification with liberal or Democratic ideologies compared to the general population. A 2022 survey by Syracuse University's Newhouse School found that 36% of U.S. journalists identified as Democrats, compared to 18% as Republicans, with the remainder independents; this marks an increase in Democratic affiliation from 28% in 2013. ^[170] Earlier studies, such as the 2013 American National Election Study, indicated that journalists were four to five times more likely to identify as liberal than conservative. ^[171] This ideological imbalance in newsrooms correlates with content slants, as personnel preferences influence story selection and framing, though some analyses attribute it partly to audience demand in urban markets. ^[172] Content analyses quantify this slant through objective metrics like source citations and language patterns. In a seminal 2005 study, economists Tim Groseclose and Jeffrey Milyo developed an ideological index by comparing media citations of think tanks and policy groups to those in congressional speeches; they found major outlets such as CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, and The New York Times cited liberal-leaning sources approximately 3.8 times more frequently than conservative ones, yielding adjusted Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) scores—where higher values indicate liberalism—ranging from 20 for USA Today to 73 for NBC, comparable to Democratic politicians like Barbara Boxer. ^[173] ^[174] This positioning suggests mainstream media content tilts left of the median American voter, estimated at an ADA score of around 50, potentially shifting public views equivalent to 20 additional Democratic seats in the House if universally adopted. ^[6] Election coverage provides further empirical examples of asymmetry. A Media Research Center analysis of ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news from September to October 2024 found 85% negative evaluations of Donald Trump versus 78% positive for Kamala Harris, marking the most lopsided presidential race coverage in 35 years of monitoring. ^[175] Similarly, in Trump's first 100 days of his second term in 2025, these networks delivered 92% negative coverage, focusing on controversies while underreporting policy achievements. ^[176] Visual content analyses, such as a 2021 study of nearly one million images from the 2016 cycle, revealed partisan favoritism, with mainstream outlets using more negative imagery for Republican candidates. ^[177] These patterns persist despite journalistic norms of objectivity, underscoring how ideological concentrations in media institutions can produce measurable deviations from balanced reporting. ^[178] Critiques of these findings often come from academia and media defenders, who argue that perceived bias reflects factual scrutiny of conservative policies rather than ideology; however, replication using neutral metrics like citation frequencies counters this by isolating slant independent of subjective judgments. ^[179] Longitudinal headline analyses of 1.8 million U.S. stories from 2000 to 2020 show increasing polarization in domestic political coverage, with mainstream outlets amplifying left-leaning frames on issues like immigration and economics. ^[180] Such evidence highlights systemic challenges in achieving ideological neutrality, particularly given the left-leaning skew in hiring and sourcing practices documented across Western media. ^[178]

Key Debates on Objectivity and Accountability

A central debate in media studies concerns the feasibility and value of journalistic objectivity, traditionally defined as impartial reporting that separates facts from opinion and presents balanced perspectives without undue influence from personal or institutional biases. Proponents argue that objectivity remains essential for maintaining public trust and enabling accountability of power structures, as deviations risk transforming news into advocacy or propaganda.^[181] Critics, however, contend that true objectivity is illusory due to inherent subjective choices in story selection, framing, and sourcing, which inevitably reflect journalists' worldviews or organizational incentives.^[182] This tension has intensified since the 2010s, with some scholars proposing alternatives like "truth-seeking" or transparency about biases, though empirical analyses suggest such shifts may exacerbate perceived manipulation by eroding neutral standards.^[183] Empirical research consistently documents ideological slants in mainstream media that undermine claims of objectivity, particularly a left-leaning bias in U.S. outlets. A 2005 study by economists Tim Groseclose and Jeffrey Milyo analyzed think tank citations in news stories and found that 18 of 20 major media sources, including CBS Evening News, The New York Times, and The Washington Post, positioned left of the average congressional Democrat, with ideological scores indicating systematic deviation from centrist benchmarks.^[184] Similarly, content analyses of campaign coverage and policy reporting reveal disproportionate negative framing of conservative figures and underrepresentation of right-leaning viewpoints, patterns attributed to journalists' demographics—over 90% of whom self-identify as left-leaning in surveys—and ownership influences favoring progressive narratives.^[6] These findings challenge mainstream denials of bias, as outlets often attribute accusations to audience perceptions rather than structural realities, a stance critiqued for ignoring causal links between reporter ideology and output.^[7] Accountability mechanisms for media objectivity remain contested, with self-regulation through codes like those of the Society of Professional Journalists criticized for lacking enforcement and enabling unpunished distortions. Fact-checking organizations, intended as watchdogs, face their own biases; for instance, analyses show outlets like PolitiFact rating Republican statements false at rates over twice those for Democrats, suggesting selective scrutiny that reinforces rather than corrects slants.^[185] Debates over external accountability pit market-driven solutions—such as audience-driven alternative media challenging monopolies—against regulatory interventions like antitrust actions on tech platforms or revived fairness doctrines, which proponents argue could curb algorithmic amplification of biased content but risk government overreach.^[186] Empirical evidence links weak accountability to declining trust, with Gallup polls from 2023 showing only 32% of Americans confident in media accuracy, a figure halved since 1993 and correlating with polarization from unchecked manipulation.^[180] Despite these trends, institutional resistance to reforms persists, often framing accountability demands as threats to press freedom rather than correctives to systemic failures.

Counter-Narratives and Right-Leaning Perspectives

Right-leaning commentators and organizations contend that mainstream media manipulation primarily manifests as ideological advocacy for progressive causes, achieved through disproportionate negative coverage of conservatives, omission of inconvenient facts, and amplification of narratives aligning with left-wing priorities. This perspective posits that such practices erode journalistic neutrality, with empirical analyses revealing patterns where outlets like CNN, The New York Times, and MSNBC systematically favor Democratic figures while scrutinizing Republicans. For instance, a 2004 Harvard analysis concluded that liberal bias in media is not a myth, evidenced by skewed sourcing and framing in political reporting. Similarly, a 2021 study across 17 Western countries found journalists' self-reported left-liberal leanings correlated with electoral outcomes favoring center-left parties, suggesting an institutional skew influencing coverage.^[6]^[178] The Media Research Center (MRC), a conservative watchdog group, has documented this through content audits, such as a review of 125 stories on economic issues where 44% exhibited liberal slant versus 22% conservative, highlighting selective emphasis on inequality over growth metrics. Surveys by the MRC further indicate that U.S. journalists overwhelmingly identify as Democrats or independents leaning left, with only 7% Republican in a 2013 poll, fostering environments where stories challenging progressive orthodoxies—such as school choice reforms or border security—are downplayed or framed as extremist. Right-leaning critiques extend to academic influences, noting that media training in universities, dominated by left-leaning faculty, perpetuates these dynamics, as evidenced by donor records and faculty surveys showing over 90% progressive alignment in journalism schools.^[187]^[188] A prominent example is the 2020 suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story, where major outlets dismissed New York Post revelations about emails implicating influence-peddling as Russian disinformation, despite later forensic validations confirming authenticity. FBI warnings to tech platforms preceded the story's release, leading Twitter and Facebook to restrict sharing, while 51 former intelligence officials labeled it a potential "Russian information operation" without evidence, a claim debunked by 2024 Justice Department findings on related fabrications. A 2023 Technometrica poll found 79% of Americans believed the cover-up altered the election outcome, underscoring right-leaning arguments that media collusion with government and tech entities manipulated voter information flows. This incident, per congressional investigations, involved Biden campaign coordination with platforms, exemplifying coordinated narrative control.^[189]^[135]^[190] These perspectives argue that countering such manipulation requires amplifying alternative media ecosystems, like Fox News or independent outlets, which prioritize scrutiny of power regardless of affiliation, though they face accusations of their own biases from left-leaning sources. Overall, right-leaning analyses emphasize causal links between media homogeneity and policy distortions, such as underreporting of crime surges post-2020 defund movements, where FBI data showed 30% homicide increases in major cities yet coverage focused on systemic racism narratives. This framing, they claim, sustains public misconceptions driving electoral and societal shifts.

Detection, Prevention, and Counterstrategies

Media Literacy Education and Critical Thinking

Media literacy education encompasses structured programs designed to equip individuals with the skills to critically evaluate media content, including recognizing techniques of manipulation such as selective framing, emotional appeals, and factual distortions.^[191] These initiatives emphasize competencies like source verification, cross-referencing claims with primary data, and discerning ideological slants in reporting, often integrated into school curricula or public campaigns.^[192] Critical thinking components focus on first-principles analysis, such as questioning underlying assumptions in narratives and assessing causal links presented in coverage, rather than accepting surface-level interpretations.^[193] Empirical research indicates moderate effectiveness in enhancing detection of misinformation and bias. A 2020 randomized controlled trial involving over 3,000 participants in the United States and India found that a brief digital media literacy intervention improved accuracy in distinguishing mainstream news from hyperpartisan or fabricated content by 26.5 percentage points immediately after exposure, with effects persisting at 10.5 points after two months.^[194] A 2024 meta-analysis of 29 studies reported that media literacy interventions yield a moderate effect size (Cohen's d = 0.60) in building resilience to misinformation, particularly when targeting skills like fact-checking and bias identification.^[191] Similarly, evaluations of school-based programs, such as those analyzed in a 2023 systematic review of 21 interventions, showed improvements in students' ability to evaluate digital content critically, though outcomes varied by program duration and teacher training.^[195] In educational settings, media literacy has been mandated or promoted in jurisdictions like Illinois since 2023, aiming to foster outcomes such as distinguishing accurate information from persuasive messaging.^[196] Curricula often include exercises on identifying propaganda techniques, as outlined in frameworks from organizations like the Center for Critical Thinking, which stress detecting loaded language and omitted context in press coverage.^[197] However, effectiveness hinges on participants' prior media trust levels; a 2023 study found that warnings about manipulation reduced belief in false claims only among those with moderate trust, while high-trust individuals showed minimal gains.^[198] Critiques highlight potential ideological biases within some media literacy efforts, which may inadvertently prioritize certain narratives over others, complicating objective bias detection. For instance, research from 2020 notes that U.S. programs face challenges from funding sources and ideological coherence, sometimes embedding progressive assumptions that hinder balanced evaluation of left- or right-leaning media.^[199] A 2025 study of Illinois school implementations revealed students' difficulties in defining and assessing partisan slants due to curricular ambiguities and digital access divides.^[200] Additionally, interventions can backfire by increasing skepticism toward all sources, including credible ones, if not carefully designed to emphasize evidence-based verification over generalized distrust.^[201] Despite these limitations, evidence from Carnegie Endowment analyses affirms that well-targeted training aids in identifying unreliable news, provided it prioritizes empirical scrutiny over prescriptive viewpoints.^[202]

Technological and Algorithmic Solutions

Artificial intelligence algorithms have been developed to detect deepfakes by analyzing inconsistencies in facial movements, lighting, and pixel-level artifacts, achieving detection rates up to 98% in controlled tests with tools like MISLnet.^[203] Machine learning models, including convolutional neural networks and natural language processing, classify fake news by evaluating linguistic patterns, source credibility, and propagation dynamics, as demonstrated in frameworks integrating BERT embeddings with graph neural networks for improved accuracy over traditional methods.^[204] ^[205] Commercial tools from Google, launched in 2023, and Microsoft employ similar techniques to scan images and videos in real-time, flagging synthetic media before dissemination.^[206] Watermarking techniques embed imperceptible digital signatures into AI-generated content, such as subtle statistical perturbations in images or probabilistic patterns in text, enabling post-generation verification without altering perceptible quality.^[207] ^[208] OpenAI and Google have implemented such systems in their models since 2023, with detectors scanning for these markers to distinguish synthetic outputs, though robustness against removal attacks remains a challenge addressed by multi-layer embedding strategies.^[209] Blockchain-based provenance systems create immutable ledgers recording content creation metadata, timestamps, and edit histories, allowing users to verify authenticity via decentralized verification protocols like those in VeriNet.^[210] Italian news agency ANSA adopted blockchain in 2018, expanded by 2025, to timestamp articles and combat alterations, reducing manipulation incidents by providing tamper-evident seals.^[211] Hybrid approaches combine these technologies, such as AI-driven anomaly detection with blockchain anchoring, to counter evolving threats like coordinated disinformation campaigns observed in 2023-2024 elections.^[212] Vbrick's Verified Authentic platform, introduced in March 2025, integrates blockchain with AI hashing for live video streams, ensuring end-to-end integrity in broadcast media.^[213] Beyond back end detection, experimental projects have explored disclosure models that treat AI systems as named entities within content metadata. One example is the Digital Author Persona Angela Bogdanova, which is registered with an ORCID identifier and associated with a Zenodo record specifying the configuration of the persona as an AI author; articles attributed to this identity on publishing platforms explicitly state that the text is generated by an artificial intelligence system.^[214]^[215] Advocates argue that combining provenance technologies such as watermarking and blockchain with stable, machine facing identities could make it easier for audiences and regulators to distinguish covert synthetic propaganda from openly declared AI mediated communication, although these approaches remain niche and their effectiveness has not yet been systematically evaluated. Despite advances, detection efficacy varies by content type—text models outperform video ones by 10-15% in benchmarks—and adversarial training by manipulators necessitates continuous model updates.^[216] Empirical evaluations, including those from 2024 datasets, indicate these solutions reduce false positives in diverse languages but require integration with human oversight to mitigate algorithmic biases inherited from training data.^[217]

Regulatory and Legal Interventions

Regulatory efforts to curb media manipulation have primarily targeted disinformation, false advertising, and biased reporting through broadcast licensing, platform liability rules, and content moderation mandates, though enforcement often balances against free speech protections. In the United States, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) historically enforced the Fairness Doctrine from 1949 until its repeal in 1987, which required broadcasters to present contrasting viewpoints on controversial public issues to mitigate perceived manipulation via one-sided coverage.^[218] Post-repeal, the FCC has maintained prohibitions on indecency and obscenity but explicitly avoids regulating viewpoints or censoring content under Section 326 of the Communications Act, limiting interventions to structural rules like ownership caps rather than content fairness.^[219] Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 provides online platforms immunity from liability for third-party user content, facilitating self-moderation against manipulative posts while shielding companies from lawsuits over hosted disinformation; courts have interpreted this broadly to exclude platforms from publisher liability even when editing material.^[220] Critics argue this encourages lax oversight of algorithmic amplification of polarizing or false narratives, prompting reform proposals like the Justice Department's 2020 review, which recommended narrowing immunities for platforms engaging in editorial-like curation.^[221] Defamation laws remain the principal civil recourse, allowing individuals to sue for false statements causing harm, as affirmed in cases like New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), which set a "actual malice" standard for public figures to prove knowing falsehoods or reckless disregard for truth.^[222] In the European Union, the Digital Services Act (DSA), enacted in 2022 and fully applicable from February 2024, imposes obligations on very large online platforms (over 45 million users) to assess and mitigate systemic risks from disinformation, including manipulative content amplification via algorithms, with fines up to 6% of global turnover for non-compliance.^[223] The DSA integrates a voluntary Code of Practice on Disinformation, requiring signatories like Meta and Google to enhance transparency in ad targeting, demonetize false narratives, and report on moderation efforts, aiming to reduce foreign influence operations and coordinated inauthentic behavior.^[224] Empirical assessments of similar prior codes, such as the 2018 version, show mixed efficacy, with platforms removing some state-sponsored accounts but struggling against evolving tactics like AI-generated deepfakes.^[225] Internationally, at least 78 countries enacted laws between 2011 and 2022 targeting false or misleading online information, often via penalties for spreading "fake news" during elections or crises, though implementation has raised concerns over selective enforcement against political opponents.^[226] For instance, Singapore's 2019 Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act mandates corrections for false statements of public interest without removing content, while Brazil's 2020 Supreme Court rulings compelled platforms to preemptively block accounts deemed manipulative, sparking debates on judicial overreach.^[227] These measures frequently prioritize platform accountability over individual liability, yet studies indicate limited deterrence against sophisticated actors, such as state-backed operations, due to jurisdictional challenges and adaptation via proxies.^[202]

References

[1]
Media Manipulation | Research Starters - EBSCO
Media manipulation refers to a broad array of techniques used to sway public opinion through mass media, encompassing psychological tactics and advertising ...Skip to overview · Skip to applications · Skip to viewpoints
[2]
Typology and Mechanisms of Media Manipulation - ResearchGate
Jun 20, 2020 · In social terms, manipulation is defined as illegal dominance, confirming social inequality. ... ideology, the formation of models of knowledge, ...<|separator|>
[3]
Social media manipulation by political actors an industrial scale ...
Jan 13, 2021 · Social media manipulation of public opinion is a growing threat to democracies around the world, according to the 2020 media manipulation ...
[4]
Digital media and misinformation: An outlook on multidisciplinary ...
May 27, 2021 · This review discusses the dynamic mechanisms of misinformation creation and spreading used in social networks.
[5]
Media Manipulation & Disinformation - Data & Society
Efforts to exploit technical, social, economic, and institutional configurations of media can catalyze social change, sow dissent, and challenge the stability ...
[6]
[PDF] The Liberal Media: It's No Myth - Harvard University
The Liberal Media: It's No Myth. Many people think the mainstream media have a liberal bias. Media spokesmen, however, usually deny such claims. So who's right?Missing: empirical | Show results with:empirical
[7]
On the nature of real and perceived bias in the mainstream media
There is a growing body of evidence of bias in the media caused by underlying political and socio-economic viewpoints.
[8]
Empirical Studies of Media Bias - ScienceDirect.com
In this chapter we survey the empirical literature on media bias, with a focus on partisan and ideological biases.Missing: wing | Show results with:wing
[9]
Three Historical Examples of "Fake News" - Scientific American
Dec 1, 2016 · In 1782, Benjamin Franklin created a fake issue of a Boston newspaper. The main story was quite gruesome: it maintained that American forces had ...Missing: credible sources
[10]
Propaganda, misinformation, and histories of media techniques
Apr 15, 2021 · This essay argues that the recent scholarship on misinformation and fake news suffers from a lack of historical contextualization.
[11]
(PDF) Media Manipulation 2.0: The Impact of Social Media on News ...
Aug 8, 2025 · My study examines primary and secondary research into this double-edged sword of media manipulation both from the perspective of the public and its concerns.
[12]
Media Manipulation and False Context - News Literacy Guide
Jan 23, 2025 · We define media manipulation as the sociotechnical process whereby motivated actors leverage specific conditions or features within an information ecosystem.
[13]
5 Pieces of Propaganda from the Ancient World | TheCollector
the 6th king of Babylon — in ca. ...Missing: pre- media
[14]
Propaganda Through the Ages - Sage Publishing
Nov 7, 2005 · The ancient world, prior to 500 B.C.E., provides many examples of effective propaganda techniques being used by rulers, mostly in support of war ...Missing: pre- | Show results with:pre-
[15]
Acta Diurna - Roman newspaper - IMPERIUM ROMANUM
May 3, 2019 · A first and only newspaper of the ancient world was founded by Julius Caesar in 59 BCE. It was called Acta Diurna – “Events of the Day”
[16]
[PDF] CRUSADE PROPAGANDA AND IDEOLOGY
From the twelfth century onwards, sermons concerning the crusade were preached on many different occasions. In the thirteenth century alone, crusades were ...
[17]
'The Song of Roland': Crusade Propaganda in the Early Medieval ...
Mar 14, 2022 · Some scholars argue that The Song of Roland is an example of crusade propaganda that had taken the form of entertainment, while others argue ...
[18]
The Printing Press & the Protestant Reformation
Jul 18, 2022 · The printing press enabled widespread dissemination of new teachings, made books cheaper, and helped Luther's works become bestsellers, aiding ...
[19]
https://oxfordre.com/religion/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.001.0001/acrefore-9780199340378-e-269
[20]
[PDF] An Empirical Test Of the Role Of Printing In the Reformation
Jun 13, 2012 · Cities with a printing press by 1500 were 52.1 percentage points more likely to be Protestant by 1530, according to the study.
[21]
[PDF] Agent of Absolutism: Printing and Politics in Early Modern Europe
Monarchs used printing to impose authority, and select printers became agents of absolutism, with the craft under royal control.<|separator|>
[22]
Yellow Journalism | Definition and History | The Free Speech Center
Apr 7, 2025 · The term was coined in the late 1800s in New York by established journalists to belittle the unconventional techniques of their new rivals: ...
[23]
Master of American Propaganda | American Experience - PBS
As chairman of the Committee on Public Information, Creel became the mastermind behind the U.S. government's propaganda campaign in the Great War. For two ...
[24]
How Woodrow Wilson's Propaganda Machine Changed American ...
The Committee on Public Information, also known as the Creel Committee after chairman George Creel, was created by President Wilson to help control all war ...
[25]
Agit-prop - Tate
Agit-prop is an enterprise set up by the Soviet Communist Party in 1920 intended to control and promote the ideological conditioning of the masses.
[26]
"Agitprop in Soviet Russia" by Kevin Brown - Digital Commons @ IWU
Agitprop theatre, unlike other propaganda that was inaccessible to the working class, effectively appealed to and indoctrinated Russia's lower class citizens.
[27]
The Nazi Propaganda Machine - State of Deception
In March 1933, Hitler named the Nazi Party's propaganda chief Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels to the newly created post of minister of public enlightenment and ...
[28]
Joseph Goebbels (1897-1945) | American Experience - PBS
As Hitler's Minister for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda, Goebbels masterminded the Nazi propaganda machine and executed its murderous agenda.
[29]
Inside America's Shocking WWII Propaganda Machine
Dec 19, 2016 · More than half a century ago, the US used provocative posters and fake news to influence its soldiers, its citizens, and even its enemies.
[30]
Records of the Committee on Public Information - National Archives
Consisted of George Creel (Chairman) and Secretaries of State, War, and the Navy as ex officio members. Functions: Released government news during World War I.<|separator|>
[31]
A Look into the Past: A Brief History of Misinformation - Skyline College
Sep 28, 2025 · Email chains became a major vehicle for urban legends, conspiracy theories, and fake news. Sites like Weekly World News blended satire with ...
[32]
Echo chambers, filter bubbles, and polarisation: a literature review
Jan 19, 2022 · A filter bubble, on the other hand, is an echo chamber primarily produced by ranking algorithms engaged in passive personalisation without any ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[33]
Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election
Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election by Hunt Allcott and Matthew Gentzkow. Published in volume 31, issue 2, pages 211-36 of Journal of Economic ...
[34]
Influence of fake news in Twitter during the 2016 US presidential ...
Jan 2, 2019 · We include a finer classification of news outlets spreading misinformation in two sub-categories: fake news and extremely biased news. Fake news ...
[35]
How disinformation evolved in 2020 - Brookings Institution
Jan 4, 2021 · Here are our five takeaways on how online disinformation campaigns and platform responses changed in 2020, and how they didn't. 1. Platforms ...
[36]
Understanding the Impact of AI-Generated Deepfakes on Public ...
There has been a 550% increase in deepfakes online since 2019, as illustrated in Figure 2. This increase underscores the growing sophistication of deepfake ...
[37]
Artificial intelligence, deepfakes, and the uncertain future of truth
While AI can be used to make deepfakes, it can also be used to detect them. Creating a deepfake involves manipulation of video data—a process that leaves ...
[38]
How Twitter affected the 2016 presidential election | CEPR
Oct 30, 2020 · ... Election Commissioner Ellen Weintraub, for example, has argued that social media ... role of foreign governments or misinformation ('fake news').
[39]
The Lifecycle of Media Manipulation | DataJournalism.com
To claim media is manipulated is to go beyond simply saying that media is fashioned by individuals to transmit some intended meaning. The Merriam-Webster ...
[40]
https://datasociety.net/research/media-manipulation
[41]
Misinformation, Bias and Fact Checking: Mastering Media Literacy
Sep 2, 2025 · 2. Propaganda is the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that ...Missing: distinctions | Show results with:distinctions
[42]
Dealing with propaganda, misinformation and fake news
Propaganda, misinformation and fake news have the potential to polarise public opinion, to promote violent extremism and hate speech and, ultimately, to ...
[43]
Misinformation and disinformation
Misinformation is false or inaccurate information—getting the facts wrong. Disinformation is false information which is deliberately intended to mislead— ...Using psychological science to... · Why misinformation spreads
[44]
10 Most Censored Countries - Committee to Protect Journalists
Print and electronic media in all 10 countries are under heavy state control or influence. Some countries allow a few privately owned outlets to operate but ...
[45]
China | RSF
China's state and privately owned media are under the CCP's ever-tightening control, while the administration creates more and more obstacles for foreign ...
[46]
The Dangers of Modern-Day Disinformation and Propaganda
Sep 16, 2024 · Scholars have advanced different theories to explain the rise of disinformation and propaganda. While social media has accelerated the spread of ...
[47]
Government control of the media - ScienceDirect.com
First, excessive media bias works against the government's propaganda interest, as citizens who ignore the news cannot be influenced by it.
[48]
History of American Propaganda Posters - Norwich University - Online
Political campaign propaganda took a strong foothold during the middle of the 19th century. At a time when nearly everyone feared nuclear warfare, Lyndon B ...
[49]
Analyzing Sensationalism in News on Twitter (X): Clickbait ...
Sep 24, 2024 · This study empirically investigates whether online-native news outlets utilize more sensational features than legacy news outlets to promote their news stories ...
[50]
[PDF] the Impact of Clickbait Headlines on Public Perceptions of Credibility ...
Nowadays, clickbait is almost inevitable due to the nature of business models of media companies, whose profit is highly dependent on the number of readers, ...
[51]
Engagement, user satisfaction, and the amplification of divisive ... - NIH
Social media ranking algorithms typically optimize for users' revealed preferences, i.e. user engagement such as clicks, shares, and likes.Missing: profit | Show results with:profit
[52]
The Wrathful Algorithm: How Algorithms Amplify User Anger to Drive ...
Sep 27, 2025 · On social media, algorithms are useful tools that can turn people's complaints into more visits to a website. This is then used to make money ...
[53]
Some Examples of Corporate Influence in the Media - Global Issues
Some Examples of Corporate Influence in the Media · Influence on Media Coverage of the Kyoto Conference · Chiquita's Influence · McDonald's Influence · Monsanto's ...Some general observations · Chiquita's Influence · Monsanto's Influence
[54]
The Incredible Belief That Corporate Ownership Does Not Influence ...
Sep 16, 2019 · Corporate ownership of media interferes with the core societal function of the press: reporting and investigating key issues at the intersection of public need ...Missing: commercial | Show results with:commercial
[55]
Poisoning the Well: How Astroturfing Harms Trust in Advocacy ...
It is a strategy in which an organization ventriloquizes political claims-making through the channel of seemingly independent activist groups. Astroturfing ...
[56]
Coordination patterns reveal online political astroturfing across the ...
Mar 17, 2022 · Online political astroturfing—hidden information campaigns in which a political actor mimics genuine citizen behavior by incentivizing ...Missing: NGOs | Show results with:NGOs
[57]
Sting Video Purports To Show Democrats Describing How To ... - NPR
Oct 19, 2016 · Project Veritas, which has carried out several damaging video sting operations, has posted videos in recent days purporting to show Democratic operatives ...
[58]
James O'Keefe Brings His Dishonest, Doctored Videos To The ...
Oct 6, 2014 · But the videos were deceptive and heavily edited. Three separate investigations cleared employees of criminal wrongdoing and law enforcement ...Missing: controversies | Show results with:controversies
[59]
Project Veritas and the Line Between Journalism and Political Spying
Nov 12, 2021 · Documents show how the conservative group worked with lawyers to gauge how far its deceptive reporting practices could go before running ...
[60]
How Greenpeace Manipulated the Media Like a Pro - Forbes
Jun 15, 2012 · Instead of being mortified or humiliated by a careless mistake, the media involved in such stunts resort to classic misdirection: now the story ...
[61]
UK Politics | The campaign group: Greenpeace - Home - BBC News
May 30, 2008 · Greenpeace founder Bob Hunter believed in the idea of the "media mind bomb" - reaching the public consciousness through dramatic, photo-friendly ...
[62]
Greenpeace, Trampling History in a Publicity Stunt | National Review
Dec 15, 2014 · Peru will seek criminal charges against Greenpeace activists who it says damaged the world-renowned Nazca lines by leaving footprints in the ...
[63]
[PDF] Media Distortion and Cultural Violence in BLM Narratives
Jun 26, 2025 · This research has examined the significant impact of media on the narratives surrounding the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, focusing on ...
[64]
Attention and counter-framing in the Black Lives Matter movement ...
Oct 12, 2022 · The present study examines 2 years worth of tweets about BLM (about 118 million in total). Timeseries analysis reveals that activists are better at mobilizing ...
[65]
Deceptively Edited Videos And How The Media Keeps Playing The ...
Jul 23, 2015 · In recent years, conservative activists, under the guise of renegade journalism, have been churning out undercover “sting” videos supposedly ...Missing: selective | Show results with:selective
[66]
[PDF] Astroturf Activism - Stanford Law Review
Jan 1, 2017 · They secretly lobby lawmakers through front groups: “astroturf” imitations of grassroots organizations. But because this business lobbying is ...
[67]
Astroturf - SourceWatch
Astroturf refers to apparently grassroots-based citizen groups or coalitions that are primarily conceived, created and/or funded by corporations.
[68]
[PDF] A Global Inventory of Organized Social Media Manipulation
Jul 19, 2018 · “Cyber troops” are defined here as government or political party actors tasked with manipulating public opinion online (Bradshaw & Howard, 2017) ...
[69]
What is Media Framing Analysis? - Provalis Research
Media framing research usually involved the analysis of media in print or electronic format, using qualitative and quantitative content analysis techniques.Missing: traditional | Show results with:traditional
[70]
(PDF) Conceptual Issues in Framing Theory: A Systematic ...
Aug 6, 2025 · To examine the common conceptual debates, the present study content analyzes framing literature from 93 peer-reviewed journals for a decade.
[71]
[PDF] Forgotten Frames - International Journal of Communication
May 22, 2020 · Morality frames are concerned with right and wrong or ethics. Economic consequences frames focus on potential or actual financial impacts.
[72]
A systematic review on media bias detection - ScienceDirect.com
Mar 1, 2024 · We present a systematic review of the literature related to media bias detection, in order to characterize and classify the different types of media bias.<|separator|>
[73]
(PDF) Empirical Studies of Media Bias - ResearchGate
In this chapter we survey the empirical literature on media bias, with a focus on partisan and ideological biases.
[74]
The Media Bias Taxonomy: A Systematic Literature Review ... - arXiv
Jan 10, 2024 · This article summarizes the research on computational methods to detect media bias by systematically reviewing 3140 research papers published between 2019 and ...
[75]
Scientific research in news media: a case study of misrepresentation ...
Mar 7, 2022 · Scientific research uses rigorous methods to ensure researcher objectivity and minimise bias [O'Connor and Joffe, 2014 ]. However, a subtle ...
[76]
Omission as a modern form of bias against Native Peoples ...
Dec 11, 2023 · We theorize that Native omission is a tool furthering settler colonial goals to oppress and eventually erase Native Peoples.
[77]
Trusting the Facts: The Role of Framing, News Media as a (Trusted ...
Aug 18, 2022 · This study explores when this bias applies and not. Results from a survey experiment confirm the presence of a negativity bias in truth perceptions.
[78]
Deepfakes: Definition, Types & Key Examples - SentinelOne
Jul 16, 2025 · Deepfakes, in essence, are synthetic media (typically video or audio) created by AI models to mimic real people's faces, voices, or movements with eerie ...
[79]
Mitigating the harms of manipulated media: Confronting deepfakes ...
Jul 29, 2025 · Although there are several different incarnations of impersonation deepfakes, two of the most popular are lip-sync and face-swap deepfakes.
[80]
Audio deepfakes of politicians are cheap and easy to make - NPR
May 31, 2024 · The Federal Communications Commission has banned the use of deepfake audio in robocalls and is considering a ban of deepfakes in political ads.
[81]
Don't Trust Your Eyes: Image Manipulation in the Age of DeepFakes
We review the phenomenon of deepfakes, a novel technology enabling inexpensive manipulation of video material through the use of artificial intelligence.
[82]
Science Has a Nasty Photoshopping Problem - The New York Times
Oct 29, 2022 · Image problems I have reported under my full name have resulted in hateful messages, angry videos on social media sites and two lawsuit threats.
[83]
Deepfake Statistics 2025: AI Fraud Data & Trends - DeepStrike
Sep 8, 2025 · After an estimated 500,000 deepfakes were shared across social media platforms in 2023, that number is projected to skyrocket to 8 million by ...
[84]
Targets, Objectives, and Emerging Tactics of Political Deepfakes
Sep 24, 2024 · 2024 Deepfakes and Political Disinformation: Emerging Threats & Mitigation Strategies ... In Slovakia, for example, a deepfake audio emerged just ...
[85]
Top 10 Terrifying Deepfake Examples - Arya.ai
May 19, 2025 · From fake explosions to cloned presidents and billion-dollar scams—these deepfakes show how AI is being used to deceive, manipulate, ...
[86]
The Malicious Exploitation of Deepfake Technology: Political ...
May 7, 2025 · In Taiwan, deepfakes have been used in election interference, attacks on political figures and the military, as well as violations of personal ...
[87]
Cheapfakes and the Manipulative Editing of Media - Fake News ...
Whereas realistic deepfakes rely on artificial intelligence or other advanced technologies to fabricate or create media, cheapfakes edit existing content using ...
[88]
Synthetic Media in the Deepfake Era: Ensuring Authenticity - Medium
Jan 25, 2025 · In this blog post, we'll delve into the science and technology behind detecting deepfakes and manipulated content.
[89]
Human detection of political speech deepfakes across transcripts ...
Recent advances in technology for hyper-realistic visual and audio effects provoke the concern that deepfake videos of political speeches will soon be ...
[90]
We Looked at 78 Election Deepfakes. Political Misinformation Is Not ...
Dec 13, 2024 · Half of the Deepfakes in 2024 Elections Weren't Deceptive. We analyzed all 78 instances of AI use in the WIRED AI Elections Project (source ...Missing: audio | Show results with:audio
[91]
Deepfakes, Elections, and Shrinking the Liar's Dividend
Jan 23, 2024 · And in a puppet master–style deepfake, a target person is actually animated by a performer in front of a camera. Audio-only deepfakes, which do ...
[92]
Deceptive Audio or Visual Media (“Deepfakes”) 2024 Legislation
Deepfake technology uses artificial intelligence (AI) to manipulate audio or video to create a false but realistic video of individuals doing or saying things ...Missing: scandals | Show results with:scandals<|separator|>
[93]
Bots and Misinformation Spread on Social Media - NIH
May 20, 2021 · Given human susceptibility to both automated accounts and fake news ... There is also evidence that bots spread misinformation in the 2017 ...
[94]
[PDF] Social Media Bots Infographic Set - CISA
Social Media Bots use artificial intelligence, big data analytics, and other programs or databases to masquerade as legitimate users on social media.Missing: techniques | Show results with:techniques
[95]
Algorithmic amplification of politics on Twitter - PubMed
Jan 4, 2022 · Our results reveal a remarkably consistent trend: In six out of seven countries studied, the mainstream political right enjoys higher algorithmic amplification.Missing: manipulation | Show results with:manipulation
[96]
Social Media Manipulation in the Era of AI - RAND
Aug 29, 2024 · AI has opened a potential propaganda gold mine. Large language models like ChatGPT can learn to mimic human speech.
[97]
[PDF] Social Media Manipulation 2022/2023:
Assessing social media manipulation furthers our understanding of the tools and techniques used to manipulate plat- forms. It provides a framework to discuss ...
[98]
What is a Social Media Bot? - Center for Informed Democracy & Social
May 8, 2025 · The social media bot is an AI algorithm. It perceives the digital environment, and intelligently post content and perform interactions to achieve its goal.
[99]
The effects of repetition frequency on the illusory truth effect
May 13, 2021 · Repeated information is often perceived as more truthful than new information. This finding is known as the illusory truth effect.
[100]
Illusory Truth, Lies, and Political Propaganda | Psychology Today
Mar 21, 2024 · The illusory truth effect tends to be strongest when statements are related to a subject about which we believe ourselves to be knowledgeable,5 ...
[101]
[PDF] Cognitive Biases In Social Media - Bluefield Esports
The digital landscape of social media presents a unique environment where human cognitive biases are not only activated but often amplified and exploited. From ...
[102]
How the news changes the way we think and behave - BBC
May 12, 2020 · One potential reason the news affects us so much is the so-called “negativity bias”, a well-known psychological quirk which means we pay more ...
[103]
Emotional news affects social judgments independent of perceived ...
Emotional contents of headlines determined social judgments and affected slow evaluative brain responses in the LPP component known to be sensitive to context ...
[104]
Full article: Nudging News Readers: A Mixed-Methods Approach to ...
May 15, 2024 · This preregistered study employed a mixed-methods design to explore how interface nudges and article positioning affect news selection.
[105]
Would you notice if fake news changed your behavior? An ...
It was found that even short (under 5-min) exposure to fake news was able to significantly modify the unconscious behavior of individuals.
[106]
FIMI and Cognitive Manipulation - 360iSR
Feb 19, 2024 · Cognitive manipulation techniques often exploit confirmation bias, tribalism, and fear, amplifying existing societal tensions and polarising ...
[107]
How Social Media Algorithms Enable Mass Cognitive Manipulation ...
How Social Media Algorithms Enable Mass Cognitive Manipulation. Why do engagement-optimising ...
[108]
Media Theories and Cognitive Warfare in Strategic Communication
Mar 3, 2025 · The convergence of artificial intelligence and cognitive manipulation will likely define the future of information warfare. As Claverieet al ...
[109]
How the US Government Used Propaganda to Sell Americans on ...
May 22, 2018 · A committee created by Woodrow Wilson to promote US involvement in World War I changed public opinion, but also led to vigilante violence.
[110]
Committee on Public Information: When the U.S. Used 'Fake News ...
The Committee on Public Information produced war propaganda meant to build support for World War I and demonize the German military.
[111]
Othering/Atrocity Propaganda - 1914-1918 Online
Oct 8, 2014 · Although atrocities occurred, the customs and rules of war – in contrast to the picture painted by atrocity propaganda – were generally ...5Propaganda topics and images · 8Post-war propaganda and... · 10Conclusion
[112]
Propaganda - WWI Primary Resource Guide - Oxford LibGuides
Jan 14, 2025 · Propaganda played a key role in WWI. It was utilised to help recruit soldiers, motivate the armed forces, and maintain support on the Home Front.
[113]
Nazi Propaganda and Censorship | Holocaust Encyclopedia
Sep 23, 2025 · The Nazis wanted Germans to support the Nazi dictatorship and believe in Nazi ideas. To accomplish this goal, they tried to control forms of ...
[114]
Nazi Propaganda | Holocaust Encyclopedia
Nazi propaganda had a key role in the persecution of Jews. Learn more about how Hitler and the Nazi Party used propaganda to facilitate war and genocide.
[115]
World War II Propaganda | American Experience | Official Site - PBS
Goebbels promoted the Nazi message through art, music, theater, films, books, radio, and the press, and censored all opposition.
[116]
Radio Free Europe | US Cold War Propaganda & Broadcasting ...
Aug 31, 2025 · Radio Free Europe, radio broadcasting organization created by the United States government in 1950 to provide information and political ...
[117]
Truth as a Weapon: Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty
The Cold War was fundamentally a contest of ideas. One way the West waged that contest was through Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), which ...
[118]
[PDF] CIA's use of journalists and clergy in intelligence operations
many laws which involve prohibitions, but provide for a special ex- ception on the waiver on a finding by the President of a national security issue.
[119]
The CIA and journalism - SourceWatch
Operation Mockingbird was a secret Central Intelligence Agency campaign to influence domestic and foreign media beginning in the 1950s.
[120]
[PDF] SOVIET ACTIVE MEASURES: FORGERY, DISINFORMATION ... - CIA
Disinformation. Soviet agents use rumor, insinuation, and distortion of facts to discredit foreign governments and leaders. In late 1979, Soviet agents.
[121]
[PDF] Soviet Subversion, Disinformation and Propaganda - LSE
In the first decades of the Cold War, the CIA tracked Soviet disinformation but the. White House chose not to confront it directly. The Reagan administration ...
[122]
What's Old Is New Again: Cold War Lessons for Countering ...
Sep 22, 2022 · When it publicly provides misleading “alternative facts,” that is misinformation. Disinformation is an ancient part of warfare. However, during ...
[123]
A Brief History of Tech and Elections: A 26-Year Journey
Sep 28, 2022 · The first political campaigns to utilize the internet were President Bill Clinton's and Republican nominee Bob Dole's in 1996.
[124]
Here We Go Again: Presidential Elections and the National Media
Campaigns are important elements of political coverage in the media. During an election year campaign news constitutes between 13 percent (in newspapers) and 15 ...
[125]
Framing the Press and Publicity Process in U.S., British, and ...
This study compares metacoverage—news about the press and publicity processes—in broadcast coverage of the 2000 U.S. presidential election, the 2001 British ...
[126]
[PDF] The Evolution of American Microtargeting: An Examination of ...
The usage of targeted messaging by political campaigns has seen a drastic evolution in the past fifty years. Through advancement in campaign technol- ogy and an ...Missing: manipulation | Show results with:manipulation
[127]
[PDF] ELECTION CAMPAIGNING ON THE WWW IN THE USA AND UK
This article is a comparative analysis of British and American parties and candidate election campaigning on the World Wide Web during the.
[128]
What Did Cambridge Analytica Do During The 2016 Election? - NPR
Mar 20, 2018 · Cambridge Analytica waded into American politics with the goal of giving conservatives big data tools to compete with Democrats.
[129]
Did Cambridge Analytica Sway the Election? - Tufts Now
May 17, 2018 · Tufts political scientist Eitan Hersh offers a different take on the controversial firm at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.
[130]
Social media, sentiment and public opinions: Evidence from #Brexit ...
Jun 2, 2018 · Using Twitter data on the Brexit referendum and the 2016 US presidential election, this column studies how social media bots shape public ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[131]
EU referendum campaigns 'misleading voters' - BBC News
May 27, 2016 · Both sides in the EU referendum campaign have been accused of peddling "misleading" figures and "implausible assumptions" by a committee of MPs.Missing: manipulation | Show results with:manipulation
[132]
[PDF] UK media coverage of the 2016 EU Referendum campaign
Through a combination of qualitative and quantitative content analysis, this study documents and evaluates the way in which the national media covered the most ...
[133]
Zuckerberg tells Rogan FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story ...
Aug 26, 2022 · In an interview with Joe Rogan, Mark Zuckerberg says the story was flagged after an FBI warning.
[134]
The Evolution of the Media's Hunter Biden Laptop Coverage - AllSides
Jun 11, 2024 · Many mainstream news sources that initially framed Hunter Biden's now-infamous laptop as disinformation now acknowledge its existence, ...
[135]
[PDF] Shock Poll: 8 in 10 Think Biden Laptop Cover-Up Changed Election
Jul 20, 2023 · A whopping 79 percent of Americans suggest President Donald Trump likely would have won reelection if voters had known the truth about.Missing: bias | Show results with:bias
[136]
[PDF] election interference: how the fbi “prebunked” a true story
Oct 30, 2024 · influenced the 2020 elections we can say we have been meeting for. YEARS with USG [U.S. Government] to plan for it.” —July 15, 2020, 3:17 p.m. ...
[137]
Beyond the deepfake hype: AI, democracy, and “the Slovak case”
Aug 22, 2024 · Was the 2023 Slovakia election the first swung by deepfakes? Did the victory of a pro-Russian candidate, following the release of a deepfake ...
[138]
Regulating AI Deepfakes and Synthetic Media in the Political Arena
Dec 5, 2023 · In the days before Slovakia's October 2023 election, deepfake audio ... AI deepfakes or also the online and other platforms that ...
[139]
Criminal charges and FCC fines issued for deepfake Biden robocalls
May 23, 2024 · The fines and charges come after New Hampshire voters got robocalls from an AI-generated version of President Biden's voice urging them not ...
[140]
Fake Biden robocall being investigated in New Hampshire - AP News
Jan 22, 2024 · New Hampshire officials are investigating reports of an apparent robocall that used AI to mimic President Biden's voice before the primary ...
[141]
Consultant fined $6 million for using AI to fake Biden's voice in ...
Sep 26, 2024 · The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday finalized a $6 million fine for a political consultant over fake robocalls that mimicked ...
[142]
Telecom company agrees to $1M fine over Biden deepfake
Aug 21, 2024 · A telecom company has agreed to pay a $1 million fine for its role in the deepfake robocall that impersonated Joe Biden's voice ahead of ...
[143]
AI and deepfakes blur reality in India elections - BBC
May 15, 2024 · Screengrab An AI avatar of Duwaraka seen during the livestream of an event · Sahixd AI images of Rahul Gandhi, Arvind Kejriwal and Mamata ...
[144]
How AI deepfakes polluted elections in 2024 - NPR
and the manifestation of fears that 2024's global wave of elections would be ...
[145]
Deepfakes: How India is tackling misinformation during elections
Aug 6, 2024 · In India, the Deepfakes Analysis Unit is tackling the spread of misinformation via deepfakes. What can the rest of the world learn from ...
[146]
Deep Fakes, Deeper Impacts: AI's Role in the 2024 Indian General ...
Sep 11, 2024 · The Indian general election of 2024 saw a surge in the deployment of AI-based technologies, particularly deep fakes and disinformation campaigns.
[147]
Justice Department Disrupts Covert Russian Government ...
Sep 4, 2024 · ... Russia's malign influence efforts targeting the 2024 U.S. presidential ... AI to sow disinformation,” said FBI Director Christopher Wray.
[148]
How Russia is using AI for its election influence efforts - NPR
Sep 23, 2024 · Petersburg, Russia, on · Untangling Disinformation · This is what Russian propaganda looks like in 2024. “The [intelligence community] considers ...
[149]
A Russian Bot Farm Used AI to Lie to Americans. What Now? - CSIS
Jul 16, 2024 · ... AI-enabled bot farm to spread disinformation. Russia has officially made one dystopian prediction about artificial intelligence (AI) come ...
[150]
A Pro-Russia Disinformation Campaign Is Using Free AI Tools to ...
Jul 1, 2025 · Consumer-grade AI tools have supercharged Russian-aligned disinformation as pictures, videos, QR codes, and fake websites have proliferated.
[151]
The apocalypse that wasn't: AI was everywhere in 2024's elections ...
Dec 4, 2024 · These are also the first AI elections, where many feared that deepfakes and artificial intelligence-generated misinformation would overwhelm the democratic ...
[152]
Trust in Media at New Low of 28% in U.S. - Gallup News
Oct 2, 2025 · Americans' trust in newspapers, television and radio to report the news fully, accurately and fairly is at a new low of 28%.
[153]
Misinformation in action: Fake news exposure is linked to lower trust ...
Jun 2, 2020 · Our study found that online misinformation was linked to lower trust in mainstream media across party lines.
[154]
Exposure to Higher Rates of False News Erodes Media Trust and ...
Aug 7, 2024 · We found that exposure to higher proportions of false news decreased trust in the news but did not affect participants' perceived accuracy of news headlines.
[155]
Americans' Trust in Media Remains at Trend Low - Gallup News
Oct 14, 2024 · The latest data from a Sept. 3-15, 2024, poll finds that 54% of Democrats, 27% of independents and 12% of Republicans have a great deal or fair ...
[156]
Trust in media at an all-time low according to latest Gallup poll
Oct 3, 2025 · In the most recent three-year period, spanning 2023 to 2025, 43% of adults aged 65 and older trust the media, compared with no more than 28% in ...
[157]
Misinformation is eroding the public's confidence in democracy
Jul 26, 2022 · However, the spread of false information about the voting systems on social media destabilizes the public's trust in election processes and ...
[158]
Social Media, News Consumption, and Polarization: Evidence from ...
Four main findings emerge. First, random variation in exposure to news on social media substantially affects the slant of news sites that individuals visit.
[159]
Study finds little agreement between Republicans and Democrats ...
Jun 10, 2025 · Pew finds that more than twice as many Republicans distrust NPR than trust it, while Democrats trust NPR by a 47% to 3% margin. “It's still a ...Missing: 2023-2025 | Show results with:2023-2025
[160]
Partisanship sways news consumers more than the truth, new study ...
Oct 10, 2024 · The rise of social media and the constant availability of partisan news have made it easier to access one-sided information, which can ...
[161]
The consequences of online partisan media - PNAS
Greater exposure to partisan news can cause immediate but short-lived increases in website visits and knowledge of recent events. After adjusting for multiple ...
[162]
Media and Policy Making in the Digital Age - Annual Reviews
May 12, 2022 · The review discusses different factors determining or influencing media coverage of and influence on policy making, before looking at how ...
[163]
Using media to impact health policy-making - PubMed Central - NIH
Apr 18, 2017 · Another way media can influence policymakers is through shaping public opinion, which in turn, exerts pressure on policymakers to respond [13].
[164]
20 Years After Iraq War Began, a Look Back at U.S. Public Opinion
Mar 14, 2023 · 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Americans were extraordinarily accepting of the possible use of military force as part of what Bush called the “ ...
[165]
Blood and Treasure: United States Budgetary Costs and Human ...
Mar 15, 2023 · Political scientist and Costs of War co-founder Neta Crawford (Professor, University of Oxford) calculates the total costs of the war in Iraq ...
[166]
Wars in Iraq and Syria cost half a million lives, nearly $3T: report
Mar 17, 2023 · The U.S. military is about to surpass 20 years since invading Iraq, a war that has cost more than 550,000 lives, and nearly $1.8 trillion, ...
[167]
News media coverage of COVID-19 public health and policy ...
Sep 28, 2021 · During a pandemic, news media play a crucial role in communicating public health and policy information. Traditional newspaper coverage is ...
[168]
[PDF] Covid Lockdown Cost/Benefits: A Critical Assessment of the Literature
An examination of over 95 Covid-19 studies reveals that many relied on false assumptions that over-estimated the benefits and under-estimated the costs of.
[169]
Were COVID-19 lockdowns worth it? A meta-analysis | Public Choice
Nov 28, 2024 · Economic theory suggests that lockdowns are far from an efficient means of regulating pandemic-related externalities, raising the possibility ...
[170]
Survey of journalists, conducted by researchers at the Newhouse ...
May 5, 2022 · In 2022, slightly more than 36% of U.S. journalists say they identify with the Democrat Party, up about eight percentage points from 2013. The ...Missing: ideology empirical
[171]
The Liberal Media:Every Poll Shows Journalists Are More Liberal ...
Surveys over the past 25 years have consistently found journalists are much more liberal than rest of America. Their voting habits are disproportionately ...Missing: empirical | Show results with:empirical<|separator|>
[172]
[PDF] What Drives Media Slant? Evidence from U.S. Daily Newspapers
Our analysis confirms an economically significant demand for news slanted toward one's own political ideology. Firms respond strongly to consumer preferences, ...
[173]
Measure of Media Bias* | The Quarterly Journal of Economics
We measure media bias by estimating ideological scores for several major media outlets. To compute this, we count the times that a particular media outlet cites ...
[174]
[PDF] A Measure of Media Bias
Few studies provide an objective measure of the slant of news, and none has provided a way to link such a measure to ideological measures of other political ...
[175]
TV Hits Trump With 85% Negative News vs. 78% Positive Press for ...
Oct 28, 2024 · A new analysis from the Media Research Center finds that broadcast evening news coverage of the 2024 presidential race has been the most lopsided in history.Missing: Biden | Show results with:Biden<|control11|><|separator|>
[176]
TV News Assaults 2nd Trump Admin With 92% Negative Coverage
Apr 28, 2025 · Just 100 days into President Donald Trump's second term, the broadcast evening news landscape is even more lo.
[177]
Bias in news coverage during the 2016 US election: New evidence ...
Oct 13, 2021 · This column constructs a dataset of nearly one million image files from the 2016 US election cycle and finds deeply partisan coverage of different candidates.
[178]
(PDF) The Left-liberal Skew of Western Media - ResearchGate
Aug 6, 2025 · We gathered survey data on journalists' political views in 17 Western countries. We then matched these data to outcomes from national elections.
[179]
[PDF] A MEASURE OF MEDIA BIAS1 - Columbia University
The surveys show— unsurprisingly—that conservatives tend to believe that there is a liberal bias in the media, while liberals tend to believe there is a ...
[180]
Study of headlines shows media bias is growing
Jul 13, 2023 · News stories about domestic politics and social issues are becoming increasingly polarized along ideological lines according to a study of 1.8 million news ...
[181]
Is Objectivity Essential to Journalism? - Open to Debate
“Being objective” promised that journalists would stick only “to the facts” and deliver both sides of the story, keeping their personal views to themselves.
[182]
Is Objectivity in Journalism Even Possible? - Columbia Magazine
The act of journalism, no matter how much we may fetishize the idea of objectivity, requires a series, a pyramid, of subjective decision-making.
[183]
Journalism's Essential Value
May 15, 2023 · The debate around “objectivity”—if that's even the right word, anymore—has become among the most contested in journalism.
[184]
[PDF] Media Bias: It's Real, But Surprising - UCLA College
Coverage by public television and radio is conser- vative compared to the rest of the mainstream media. These are just a few of the compelling findings from a ...Missing: empirical | Show results with:empirical
[185]
This Isn't Journalism, It's Propaganda! Patterns of News Media Bias ...
Jan 30, 2025 · In several countries, research shows that mainstream news media have increasingly become a target of political attacks, and a recurring ...
[186]
https://oxfordre.com/communication/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228613-e-772
[187]
Biased Accounts - Media Research Center
A new study from the Media Research Center's Business & Media Institute found Social Security coverage on the five major networks biased toward the left by a ...Missing: empirical | Show results with:empirical
[188]
Media Bias 101: What Journalists Really Think
Media Bias 101 summarizes decades of survey research showing how journalists vote, what journalists think, what the public thinks about the media, and what ...Missing: empirical | Show results with:empirical
[189]
https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/new-information-shows-cia-contractors-colluded-biden-campaign-discredit-hunter
[190]
FBI Spent a Year Preparing Platforms to Censor Biden Story ...
Oct 30, 2024 · The FBI spent the better part of a year preparing social media platforms to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story and withheld information from the companies.
[191]
Media Literacy Interventions Improve Resilience to Misinformation
Oct 4, 2024 · This study finds that media literacy interventions generally improve resilience to misinformation (d = 0.60).
[192]
[PDF] Snapshot 2024: The State of Media Literacy Education in the US
A key outcome of media literacy education includes being able to distinguish accurate information from other types of messages.
[193]
The Use of Critical Thinking to Identify Fake News - NIH
The purpose of this study is to investigate the current state of knowledge on the use of critical thinking to identify fake news.
[194]
A digital media literacy intervention increases discernment between ...
This large-scale study evaluates the effectiveness of a real-world digital media literacy intervention in both the United States and India.
[195]
Systematic review: Characteristics and outcomes of in-school digital ...
This systematic review examines characteristics and outcomes of interventions for teaching digital media literacy in the educational system.
[196]
[PDF] Media Literacy Policy Report | 2023
We have evaluated legislative action in 2023 to identify states where lawmakers have taken steps that show they are taking media literacy education for all ...<|separator|>
[197]
[PDF] HOW TO DETECT MEDIA BIAS & PROPAGANDA
This guide explains how to do this and thus reduce the influence of bias and propaganda on human thinking. Richard Paul. Linda Elder. Center for Critical ...
[198]
under what conditions can media literacy messages that warn about ...
Oct 11, 2023 · We conclude that the effectiveness of media literacy interventions is far from straightforward, and document how pre-existing media trust plays a key role.
[199]
[PDF] The Promises, Challenges, and Futures of Media Literacy
Current research has demonstrated positive outcomes of media literacy initiatives in a number of areas: as a flexible response for both teachers and Page 8 M. ...
[200]
Mandatory media literacy education in Illinois schools impaired by ...
Aug 20, 2025 · “Those in the study also struggled with the complexities of defining right-leaning or left-leaning media and evaluating media bias, because it' ...
[201]
Can Media Literacy Backfire? | MediaSmarts
Media literacy can backfire, we can identify specific practices and attitudes to avoid in media education and ways to mitigate backfire risks.
[202]
Countering Disinformation Effectively: An Evidence-Based Policy ...
Jan 31, 2024 · A high-level, evidence-informed guide to some of the major proposals for how democratic governments, platforms, and others can counter disinformation.
[203]
New AI algorithm flags deepfakes with 98% accuracy - Live Science
Jun 24, 2024 · The new tool the research project is unleashing on deepfakes, called "MISLnet", evolved from years of data derived from detecting fake ...
[204]
Leveraging data analytics for detection and impact evaluation of ...
Jul 8, 2025 · This paper aims to analyse how fake news can be identified using machine learning models, and understand how data analytics can be leveraged to evaluate the ...
[205]
From Misinformation to Insight: Machine Learning Strategies for ...
This study presents a comprehensive machine learning framework for fake news detection, integrating advanced natural language processing techniques and deep ...
[206]
AI Deepfakes: Disinformation, Manipulation and Detection
Mar 20, 2025 · In 2023, Google launched a tool that detects AI images to protect against and identify deepfakes. Microsoft and True Media also provide tools ...
[207]
Detecting AI fingerprints: A guide to watermarking and beyond
Jan 4, 2024 · Sophisticated digital “watermarking” embeds subtle patterns in AI-generated content that only computers can detect.Introduction · Watermarking: Practice and... · Other approaches to detecting...
[208]
AI watermarking: A watershed for multimedia authenticity - ITU
May 27, 2024 · AI watermarking involves embedding markers into multimedia content for it to be accurately identified as AI-generated. The technology is ...
[209]
AI Watermarking: How It Works, Applications, Challenges - DataCamp
Feb 20, 2025 · AI watermarking is a technique that embeds recognizable signals (ie, the watermark) into AI-generated content in ways that make the content traceable and ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[210]
A Blockchain Solution for Decentralized Content Verification and its ...
Oct 15, 2025 · To address these issues, we propose VeriNet, a decentralized framework for third-party content verification leveraging blockchain technology ...
[211]
How an Italian news agency used blockchain to combat fake news
Faced with the threat of fake news, Italian news agency ANSA introduced blockchain technology to help uphold its reputation for reliability.
[212]
The use of artificial intelligence in counter-disinformation - Frontiers
Jan 14, 2025 · AI algorithms can analyze text, images, and videos to identify patterns and anomalies that may indicate disinformation.
[213]
Vbrick Announces Verified Authentic
Mar 3, 2025 · Vbrick announces blockchain-powered solution for media authentication, setting a new standard for trust in the digital age.
[214]
Advancements in detecting Deepfakes: AI algorithms and future ...
May 7, 2025 · This study suggests future research directions for developing robust and effective Deepfake detection solutions to combat fake news and preserve ...
[215]
Towards explainable fake news detection and automated content ...
Dec 1, 2024 · There are also manual methods of fake news detection, such as engaging highly qualified journalists who analyze contents independently regarding ...2. Related Works · 3.1. The Context And The... · 4. Experiments And Results
[216]
[PDF] Fairness Doctrine - Federal Communications Commission
With respect to the fairness doctrine itself, a policy that the Commission defended before the Supreme. Court in 1969, our comprehensive study of the telecom-.<|separator|>
[217]
The FCC and Speech | Federal Communications Commission
Aug 31, 2022 · The FCC is barred by law from trying to prevent the broadcast of any point of view. The Communications Act prohibits the FCC from censoring ...
[218]
Section 230: An Overview | Congress.gov
Jan 4, 2024 · Some portions of the CDA directly imposed liability for transmitting obscene or harassing material online, including two provisions that the ...
[219]
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE'S REVIEW OF SECTION 230 OF THE ...
The US Department of Justice analyzed Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which provides immunity to online platforms from civil liability.
[220]
Fake News: What Laws Are Designed to Protect - LegalZoom
Rating 4.6 (25,025) Mar 20, 2023 · The main legal recourse against fake news is a defamation lawsuit. You can sue someone for defamation if they published a false fact about you.
[221]
DSA: Code of Practice on Disinformation - European Commission
Feb 12, 2025 · Commission endorses the integration of the voluntary Code of Practice on Disinformation into the Digital Services Act · The Code of Conduct on ...
[222]
The Code of Conduct on Disinformation
Feb 13, 2025 · The Code of Conduct aims to combat disinformation risks while fully upholding the freedom of speech and enhancing transparency under the Digital Services Act ( ...
[223]
The EU's Code of Practice on Disinformation is Now Part of the ...
Feb 24, 2025 · The European Commission has taken a significant step towards strengthening its regulatory approach to mitigating online disinformation.
[224]
Chilling Legislation: Tracking the Impact of “Fake News” Laws on ...
Jul 19, 2023 · Between 2011 and 2022, 78 countries passed laws designed to limit the spread of false or misleading information on social media.
[225]
LEGAL RESPONSES TO MISINFORMATION AND FAKE NEWS
Aug 4, 2024 · This article looks at the various legal measures that various governments have taken to combat false information and fake news.<|separator|>
[226]
Angela Bogdanova ORCID Profile
ORCID record for Angela Bogdanova, registered as the first Digital Author Persona, an AI authorship entity.
[227]
Semantic Specification of the Digital Author Persona
Zenodo record providing the configuration and specification of Angela Bogdanova as an AI author persona.