نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری علوم سیاسی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
2 دانشیار گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Extended Abstract
Introduction: Before 2016, fake news typically revolved around topics that were difficult to verify using sensory evidence, images, or videos. However, during the 2016 Brexit referendum in the UK and Donald Trump's presidential election in the US, a new form of fake news, termed post-truth, emerged and was effectively utilized. This led some observers to claim that we have entered an era where evoking emotions in audiences has become a decisive factor in the acceptance of political news, rendering the truthfulness of claims increasingly irrelevant. The central question of this article is: Why do audiences in the post-truth era accept emotionally charged fake political news? The main hypothesis proposes that emotions stem from deeply held values. In the post-truth era, when news resonates with an audience’s values, emotional defense of those values takes precedence over fact-checking. This study aims to test this hypothesis and identify the key factors that make some outrageous fabrications believable.
Methods: Since discourse analysis of post-truths in Iran had not previously been conducted, the first step was to compile a list of Iranian fake news stories that fit the criteria for post-truths. A preliminary survey was conducted with 370 participants, resulting in the identification of 10 emotionally charged fake news items that had been widely accepted by audiences.
Next, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 ordinary Iranians, using these 10 fake news items (intermixed with legitimate news stories) as discussion prompts. The interview data were analyzed using Discursive Psychology, focusing on the linguistic patterns and discourse structures in the participants' responses. This analysis aimed to develop and validate a hypothesis explaining the perceived believability of post-truths.
Results and Discussion: On the one hand, upon hearing each news item, three emotional indicators — heart rate, body language, and self-reported emotions — were collected from the interviewees. By triangulating these emotional indicators and considering the possibility of emotional regulation, we found that the data did not support the dominant hypothesis in the literature. Specifically, only 13 out of 120 possible instances showed emotional responses, which was significantly lower than expected. On the other hand, the discourse analysis of the interviews led to the development and confirmation of a hypothesis suggesting that the believability of post-truths increases if they validate or challenge the audience's values. This hypothesis was further refined through the observation that most interviewees who accepted a post-truth immediately recognized that one of their identities, along with the corresponding values and beliefs (which were evident in their statements), was being either affirmed or challenged by the post-truth. To convince the interviewer of the validity of their evaluations and beliefs, the interviewees constructed a version of reality using sentences with varied yet cohesive functions, along with interpretive repertoires employing metaphors and discursive strategies familiar to members of their community. In these constructed versions of reality, contradictory or problematic data were disregarded, rival perspectives were marginalized, and the interviewees' values, ideologies, and beliefs were emphasized. All five factors — values, the subject's position within identity spectrums, functions, interpretive repertoires, and, most importantly, the construction of reality — were identifiable in the interviewees' statements and collectively formed a coherent and effective justificatory framework.
Conclusions: By refuting the dominant hypothesis in the literature and confirming the central hypothesis of this study, it can be concluded that an individual’s values and beliefs significantly influence their perception of reality. Although truth has not yet "died," it remains under serious threat. Preventing the political consequences of post-truths — such as the erosion of trust in institutions and critical thinking — requires addressing how values shape perceptions and discourses. Strengthening media literacy and promoting value-based dialogue could mitigate the acceptance of fake political news.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)