英文摘要
|
Reviewing relevant fact-checking literature and observing fact-checking reports produced by domestic fact-checking organizations (ie: MyGoPen, Taiwan Fact-Checking Center), there is a lack of military-related fact-checking research and systematic checking methods. However, military-related fake news can easily cause people's misconceptions and panic about life. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to analyze the information about the United States released by the Taiwan Fact Check Center from August 1, 2022 to September 30, 2022 through content analysis. There are a total of 20 inspection reports on military photographic images produced before and after the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, in order to summarize the systematic fact-checking and analysis methods of military systematic photographic images. This study summarizes the verification indicators of fact checking (ie: correctness, partial error, insufficient evidence, clarification of facts and errors), check points (ie: source of information, shooting location and time) and photographic image interpretation indicators (ie: light and shadow , resolution, focal length, color temperature and knowledge screen). The results of the research show that the verification indicators of the above-mentioned military photographic image information published by the Taiwan Fact Checking Center are all "wrong"; the sources of information for the verification points mainly come from Twitter and Facebook, the shooting locations are mainly from overseas, and there are no specific rules for the time; photography Among the image interpretation indicators, the knowledge screen has the most errors, followed by light and shadow and focal length errors. This study analyzes the characteristics and sources of military photographic images, and marks and summarizes them, so as to serve as a reference and application of military-related systematic fact-checking methods for future review organizations and the general public, and can be used as a reference for future media literacy education applications.
|
参考文献
|
-
林照真(2020)。假新聞類型與媒體聚合:以2018 年臺灣選舉為例。新聞學研究,142,111-153。
連結:
-
胡元輝(2018)。造假有效、更正無力?第三方事實查核機制初探。傳播研究與實踐,8(2),43-73。
連結:
-
游美惠(2000)。內容分析、文本分析與論述分析在社會研究的運用。調查研究,8,5-42。
連結:
-
羅文伶,邱銘心(2015)。網路健康謠言內容分析研究。教育資料與圖書館學,52(1),3-31。
連結:
-
Full Fact (2023). We check the facts. Retrieved from: https://fullfact.org/facts/
-
The New York Times (2022, December 28). As Covid-19 Continues to Spread, So Does Misinformation About It. Retrieved from: https://reurl.cc/0Eop49
-
Correctiv (2022). Ukraine: Video angeblicher Saboteure, die einen Anschlag in der Region Donezk planten, ist laut Metadaten manipuliert. Retrieved from: https://reurl.cc/ZXObX6
-
Stencel, M. & Griffin, R. (2018, February 22). Fact-checking triples over four years. Retrieved from: https://reurl.cc/6N2Zeb
-
We Are Social. (2022). DIGITAL 2022: TAIWAN. Retrieved from:https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2022-taiwan
-
台灣事實查核中心(2018)。【錯誤】媒體報導:日本關西機場因燕子颱風重創而關閉後,中國優先派巴士前往關西機場營救受困之中國旅客?資料取自:https://tfc-taiwan.org.tw/articles/150
-
台灣事實查核中心(2021)。【公投前|數位公民衝刺班】單元三、知己知彼,不實訊息常用手法大解密!資料取自:https://tfc-taiwan.org.tw/articles/6686
-
台灣事實查核中心(2022)。【研究與動態】查核中心破解新華社對全球發送假新聞照片。資料引自:https://tfc-taiwan.org.tw/articles/8168
-
何琇琪(2021)。政治大學傳播學院傳播碩士學位學程。
-
胡元輝(2020)。事實是正確報導的礎石:台灣事實查核中心的經驗與反思。NCC NEWs,14(4),1-21。
-
徐明景(2001).數位攝影的技術.台北市:田園城市文化.
-
徐明景(2021).數位攝影:光與影的入門心法.台北市:五南圖書出版.
-
黃馨儀(2020)。政治大學傳播學院傳播碩士學位學程。
-
葉嘉怡(2021)。世新大學圖文傳播暨數位出版學研究所。
-
劉蕙瑀(2020)。世新大學圖文傳播暨數位出版學研究所。
-
德國之聲(2022)。事實核查:為什麼這些烏軍的 “ 戰功 ” 並非事實?資料引自 https://reurl.cc/58m2Wn
-
蔣載榮(2010).光的解析:攝影光質的理論與控制研究.台北市:世理雜誌.
|