Human and technological infrastructures of fact-checking
May 22, 2022 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐ Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact.
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Prerna Juneja, Tanushree Mitra
arXiv ID
2205.10894
Category
cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction
Citations
59
Venue
Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact.
Last Checked
3 months ago
Abstract
Increasing demands for fact-checking has led to a growing interest in developing systems and tools to automate the fact-checking process. However, such systems are limited in practice because their system design often does not take into account how fact-checking is done in the real world and ignores the insights and needs of various stakeholder groups core to the fact-checking process. This paper unpacks the fact-checking process by revealing the infrastructures -- both human and technological -- that support and shape fact-checking work. We interviewed 26 participants belonging to 16 fact-checking teams and organizations with representation from 4 continents. Through these interviews, we describe the human infrastructure of fact-checking by identifying and presenting, in-depth, the roles of six primary stakeholder groups, 1) Editors, 2) External fact-checkers, 3) In-house fact-checkers, 4) Investigators and researchers, 5) Social media managers, and 6) Advocators. Our findings highlight that the fact-checking process is a collaborative effort among various stakeholder groups and associated technological and informational infrastructures. By rendering visibility to the infrastructures, we reveal how fact-checking has evolved to include both short-term claims centric and long-term advocacy centric fact-checking. Our work also identifies key social and technical needs and challenges faced by each stakeholder group. Based on our findings, we suggest that improving the quality of fact-checking requires systematic changes in the civic, informational, and technological contexts.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
๐ Similar Papers
In the same crypt โ Human-Computer Interaction
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Identifying Stable Patterns over Time for Emotion Recognition from EEG
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Questioning the AI: Informing Design Practices for Explainable AI User Experiences
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Deep Learning for Sensor-based Human Activity Recognition: Overview, Challenges and Opportunities
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Educational data mining and learning analytics: An updated survey
Died the same way โ ๐ป Ghosted
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted