MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404596315 · doi:10.1177/00076503241298093

Staging the Lie: The Impact of Framing and Content on the Visibility of Fake Business News

2024· article· en· W4404596315 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Illia, Stelios C. Zyglidopoulos, Philemon Bantimaroudis

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness & Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMisinformation and Its Impacts
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)VisibilityAmbiguitySocial mediaAdvertisingPublic relationsCorporate social responsibilityNarrativeReputationContent analysisBusinessPolitical scienceSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What drives the visibility of fake business news? We investigate this timely question by analyzing the framing and content of fake news targeting Fortune 500 companies. Our research reveals that fake business news employing episodic frames—characterized by highly dramatized and unambiguous information—gains more visibility than thematic frames, regardless of an organization’s reputation, its web or media visibility. Additionally, we find that fake news about corporate governance is particularly visible because it presents a detailed narrative about unmet organizational obligations, reducing the ambiguity of the message. In contrast, fake news about corporate social responsibility does not show this effect. These insights enrich existing literature by demonstrating that the visibility of fake news in social media depends not only on emotional dramatization but also on detailed portrayal. In the business context, fake news is an emotionally and cognitively driven phenomenon depending on stylistic and content frames to enhance its visibility.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.786
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness & SocietySame topicMisinformation and Its ImpactsFrench-language works237,207