Voters exposed to more junk news in 2016 US elections: study

Voters in key swing states in the US were exposed to larger amounts of 'junk news' in the run-up to the presidential elections last year, according to an Oxford study that analysed over seven million tweets.
Researchers found that although nationally the ratio of professionally produced news content to junk news was one to one, the level of 'polarising' content - from Russian, WikiLeaks and junk news sources - shared in battleground states was both higher than the national average and less competitive states.
The content used divisive and inflammatory rhetoric, and presented faulty reasoning or misleading information to manipulate the reader's understanding of public issues and feed conspiracy theories.

A swing state is a where the two major political parties have similar levels of support among voters, and are viewed as important in determining the overall result of a presidential election.
Researchers from Oxford University in the UK noted that of the 16 swing states, 11 had levels of junk news higher than the national average.
Arizona was the swing state with the highest junk news concentration, followed by Missouri, Nevada and Florida. States that were not hotly contested had, on average, lower levels of junk news, researchers said.

They found that many of the swing states receiving highly concentrated doses of polarising content were also among those with large numbers of votes in the Electoral College. For example, Florida, Arizona and Missouri all featured in the top 12 states ranked.

Researchers analysed more than seven million tweets collected between one to 11 November 2016 that contained evidence of physical location and used hashtags relating to politics and the election in the US.
Junk news can include fake, hyper-partisan or emotionally charged news content, much of which is deliberately produced false reporting, researchers said.
The study also took into account content from Russian sources and WikiLeaks.
"We were surprised to find that the ratio of professionally produced news to junk news on Twitter was around one to one," said Philip Howard, senior researcher professor at Oxford University.