EU DisinfoLab for the European Parliamentary Research Service (2019). Automated tackling of disinformation

This study maps and analyses current and future threats from online misinformation, alongside currently adopted socio-technical and legal approaches. The challenges of evaluating their effectiveness and practical adoption are also discussed. Drawing on and complementing existing literature, the study summarises and analyses the findings of relevant journalistic and scientific studies and policy reports in relation to detecting, containing and countering online disinformation and propaganda campaigns. It traces recent developments and trends and identifies significant new or emerging challenges. It also addresses potential policy implications for the EU of current socio-technical solutions.

Fallis (2015). What is Disinformation?

This paper surveys the various analyses of the concept of disinformation that have been proposed by information scientists and philosophers.

Frau-Meigs (2018). Societal costs of fake news in the digital single market, a study requested by the IMCO Committee, European Parliament (PE 626.087)

This study explores the mechanisms of “fake news” and their societal costs in the Digital Single Market. It describes the risks to the integrity of information and to the integrity of elections. It highlights the roles of the various actors involved in the production and amplification of such information disorders. Finally, it outlines responses that are being tested in different parts of Europe to deal with the issue.

Innes (2019). The Internet Research Agency in Europe 2014-2016

This report documents the scale of Russian interference in European democracies, and is evidence of the Kremlin-backed Internet Research Agency’s long-term interest in European politics and elections.

Marwick and Lewis (2017). Media manipulation and disinformation online

The study analyses how internet subcultures take advantage of the current media ecosystem to manipulate news frames, set agendas, and propagate ideas.

McNamee (2019). ‘Zucked – Waking Up to the Facebook Catastrophe

The New York Times bestseller about a noted tech venture capitalist, early mentor to Mark Zuckerberg, and Facebook investor, who wakes up to the serious damage Facebook is doing to our society – and sets out to try to stop it.

Polyakova and Fried (2019). ‘Democratic Defence Against Disinformation’ for the Atlantic Council

This paper analyses the rapid development of policy responses of governments and social media companies to the challenge of disinformation.

Ramsay and Robertshaw (2019). Weaponising news RT, Sputnik and targeted disinformation

The report contains three separate analyses of English-language news content published by RT and Sputnik and its implications for news organisations in Western democracies. Together, the analyses comprise a comprehensive analysis of how Russian state-linked news outlets play a variety of roles in different situations, ranging from coordinating damage-control messaging to amplifiers of Russian prestige and aggregators of negative content about Western domestic politics.

Shore, Baek, and Dellarocas (2016). Network structure and patterns of information diversity on Twitter

Considering that users can choose whom to follow, prior research suggests that social media users exist in “echo chambers” or become polarized. The authors seek evidence of this in a complete cross-section of hyperlinks posted on Twitter, using previously validated measures of the political slant of news sources to study information diversity.

Tucker et al. (2018). Social media, political polarization, and political disinformation: A review of the scientific literature

The article presents an overview of the current state of the literature on the relationship between social media; political polarization; and political “disinformation,” a term used to encompass a wide range of types of information about politics found online, including “fake news,” rumors, deliberately factually incorrect information, inadvertently factually incorrect information, politically slanted information, and “hyperpartisan” news.