Name: フェイクニュースの消費者 - コンピュータマニア (Fake News Consumers - Computerphile)
Uploaded: 2021-01-14T10:16:27.000Z
Duration: 13 min 44 s
Description: VoiceTubeの動画で発音を聞きながら英語表現を覚えよう！学べる英語：

We're interested in sort of the intersection between humans and computers.

動名詞

Ondas, a part of my junior on meeting various researchers I met with Christian on immediately, sort of identified some natural research interests that we shared.

It's been an interesting encounter of computer scientists.

That's certainly not me and sociologists.

We've been working on this Internet, that disciplinary fashion, complaining descriptive servers to help people consume news with, ah, very interesting experiments.

There's been very much driven by the computer scientists involved in this, which has tried to capture and tap into what people do when they come face to face with with news fate.

Otherwise, one thing we're interested in.

Computers parent science perspective is the history of information, which you refer to its provenance on.

The idea is that you can look at the veracity of information.

It stems from wine, actually sort of wine bottles.

Where was that wine where the grapes from where was it manufactured?

You know that history you know, this whole understanding of the white When you apply that principle to information, you can start to look out OK, how is information manipulated, particularly in the Web and so on?

And something like Wikipedia is a great example of that.

How sources have changed, how the content has changed on taking that idea and matching it with Christian's work around sort of nationalism, society and so on.

The fake news cropped up on was almost immediately right, which is, you know, how does information on dhe fake information affect society as a whole?

Fake news to me looks pretty straight for year.

They got good sources or it's no, it's making some wild claim or it's not.

So how did you guys put a couple of things?

We wanted to get sense off people's understanding.

Eso understanding of what people think news is first and foremost.

I mean, some people, instant celebrity, some people interested politicians and so on.

I said, to do that, we sent out sort of survey to various people 200 or so people.

I think I got a good sense off what people understand as what is news to them s so that gives him of the bigger picture.

Then to really delve deeper into it, he started to look at doing some some qualitative work interviews with people and understanding in the real world.

So what we did was we put together a fake Facebook page populated with a variety of different news articles.

Some of them were fakes and different new sources and so on.

And we asked people to look through that news food A CZ, if it were their own, suggest information and try and identify what is the fake news in that space.

Now people make Ah lot of decisions very quickly.

You'd be like Yep, yep, Next, Next, next.

Your Snapchat kind of consumption of things S Oh, really?

To break that down a little bit, we have to make use.

The idea behind that is that if we can track someone's gaze on the computer, we can look out.

What information Where's with screen They digesting is a part of that breakdown analysis of their news.

I want it allowed us to do was to see Okay, Well, people have a tendency A to look at the title of the news article.

First and foremost, make what you can see if they're making a kind of initial judgment at that point in time.

It instantly, I'd feel, you know, skepticism about that.

Whereas if it said Trump has done something ridiculous again, probably more true at that point in time, you'd say OK if I have some doubt about that.

What people tend to do then, is look at the source of the article, which is the link links above.

And it was something from the BBC, people would typically say, Yeah, okay, I believe that if it's something from, um or counting committee faking that well, like satire.

Yes, I status and click click based Clickbait sorting in the woods so consumed understand about point.

Now, there were cases where another micro judgment was made, which is where people would say Okay, well, I'm not sure about the article.

They'll go into the article that look more form or information.

And that's when we'll start to look at things like dates like the content, the way it's written with author and so on.

So you can start really break down this kind of order, almost criteria that people are instantly using to make make judgments about these things.

Does this all sounds kind of very logical, Very kind of orders.

Do you think everybody does all those things?

People do it in different ways, but I think for the most part people do.

And then I realized they're doing it on Guy.

Actually, some people would look at the source first in an article as a as a part of their natural consumption of this information.

Others then would skip over things broadly very quickly.

But I believe based on the data we've got, that people are making these micro judgments quickly.

This is a video we recorded off some of the eye tracking that we did.

So this is this is the Facebook page a little Let's play it now.

You can see that the dots moving around is where someone's gaze is on the circle gets bigger, the longer looking at something you can see this person looking around the screen looking at the source.

Their eyes are jumping around the place because all the while this is happening.

We're using what's called a sort of think aloud protocol, and that's where we're asking someone to look through this feed on, talk out loud about what they're doing.

Yes, yes, they're gonna try and make it as convincing as possible consuming media.

In this way, it's quite private thing in a way, right?

There's no one around watching you do it.

And so, in the first instance, to ask someone to talk through the sort of logic of their thinking as they're looking through this stuff is kind of strange.

Actually, there's almost a level of discomfort that comes from talking about these things because you're being challenged on something that you normally challenged about on.

For example, someone said to me, Well, when I've thought about this, I I immediately think, Yeah, I trust the BBC Trust.

When someone asks me why Do you trust that as a new source?

I kind of just just do like I kind of have trusted it for a long period of time.

And, God, why is it that I trust that was a new source on that kind of question?

When one turns on these things, What is it that this research do you think will lead to Where, where we going with this?

I mean, the first is is that we can look at and understand how people as a community, verifying news.

So, you know, social media, shared space.

People can comment on things and actually a lot off people's trust in news that they get it.

It's from their friend or friends commented on something.

So it's kind of this trust thing, but I guess where we're moving with this is really around.

How can technology support people in this space?