Once You Fall In, More Follows... Lured by "Shock" and "Fact" Labels for Stronger Impact [Fake News Floods SNS Politics ②]

Content Spreads Through Profit-Driven 'Political Influencers'
'Filter Bubble' Algorithms Fuel a Vicious Cycle of Fake News Exposure
Partial Distortion of Facts Makes False Information Hard to Identify

Editor's NoteFake news and smear campaigns are repeated without fail every election season. Candidates' words and actions are distorted and repackaged into short videos, while unverified information is spread under the guise of 'facts.' Social networking services (SNS) have shifted from being channels for information delivery to tools of agitation, and voters, as both consumers and disseminators, are swept up in public opinion. As false information threatens democracy, elections are becoming 'battlegrounds of public opinion' rather than 'arenas of politics.' As a result, the public sphere is becoming extremely fragmented, and there is growing concern that even the minimum core information shared by the public may disappear. In this three-part series, we examine the problems and realities of SNS political warfare and explore possible solutions.

Various pieces of false information targeting major presidential candidates tend to downplay the truth and exaggerate emotions during their distribution. Such content commonly relies on 'rapid consumption,' 'strong stimulation,' and 'ambiguous sources.' On TikTok, videos are quickly summarized into 15 to 30 seconds. Subtitles and background music intensify visual and auditory stimulation. In particular, keywords such as 'fact' or 'shock' are inserted into the screen to induce trust and interest, leading viewers to mistake fake news for real news.

At the center of this spread of similar content are so-called 'political influencers.' These individuals operate based on a revenue structure tied to content views, and they provoke negative emotions toward specific candidates to elicit user reactions. They go beyond simply providing information, producing videos in a way that stirs public opinion, so that emotional agitation outweighs the actual content. This is because views and watch time are directly linked to YouTube advertising revenue.

Analysts also point out that platform algorithms contribute to this structure of content proliferation. TikTok sequentially recommends similar content based on users' 'watch time' and 'reactions,' while Facebook exposes certain posts at the top of feeds according to users' political tendencies, creating what is known as a 'filter bubble.' A 'filter bubble' refers to the phenomenon where internet information providers deliver only filtered, tailored information to users. As a result, once a user is exposed to fake news of a particular tendency, they fall into a vicious cycle of seeing even more similar content.

Another issue is that self-regulation by SNS platforms does not fully control fake news. Platforms like Facebook and YouTube require a report and review process for false information according to their policies, but there are ongoing criticisms that the response is slow and the criteria for deletion are unclear. In the case of TikTok, a significant portion of reported political content remains available because it is often deemed 'not in violation of community guidelines.'

The fact that content cleverly evades the criteria for being classified as 'fake news' also exacerbates the problem. The key is that the content does not consist of complete fabrications, but rather exists in forms that distort or selectively extract parts of the truth. In such cases, even if related videos are reported, the platform does not promptly take them down. An official from the National Election Commission stated, "Even when we receive reports of false information or blatantly slanderous content, we first need to determine whether the content requires deletion, which takes time," and added, "Since deletion authority rests with each community, immediate removal is difficult and we must request their cooperation."

It is also notable that voters, once consumers of information, have now become intermediaries for its spread. A young voter living in Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, said, "When I come across a politician's harsh remarks or fake news videos on SNS, I sometimes see them as comedic content or share them with friends as a joke for fun." Moon Cheolsoo, a professor in the Department of Media, Film, Advertising, and Public Relations at Hanshin University, stated, "Ultimately, literacy education for people receiving information is most important," and added, "It seems the only solution is to equip ordinary people with the ability to discern fake news."