The ongoing decline of local news not only deprives communities of important information, but also provides an opening for misinformation through so-called pink slime journalism: local media that poses as a news outlet and exploits the low cost of automating content to deceive readers. Is there an advantage to posing as a newspaper online? In this study, I use a survey experiment to assess how readers respond to the same headline delivered to them as a fake newspaper, a fake website, or a real television station. Respondents rated the fake local newspaper as less credible than a real television station or a fake local website, but they rated fake local websites as credibly as real local television. Readers’ preference for following local or national news and the timing of assessment moderate these effects.
AbernathyPenny M.2018. The expanding news desert. Chapel Hill, NC: Center for Innovation and Sustainability in Local Media, School of Media and Journalism, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
2.
ArceneauxKevinJohnsonMartin. 2015. More a symptom than a cause: Polarization and partisan news media in America. In American gridlock: The sources, character, and impact of political polarization, eds. ThurberJames A.YoshinakaAntoine, 309–36. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
3.
BenganiPriyanjana. 18December2019. Hundreds of “pink slime” local news outlets are distributing algorithmic stories and conservative talking points. Tow Reports: Columbia Journalism Review. Available from https://tinyurl.com/rwydvcwj.
4.
BenganiPriyanjana. 4August2020. As election looms, a network of mysterious “pink slime” local news outlets nearly triples in size. Tow Reports: Columbia Journalism Review. Available from https://tinyurl.com/hevv4uwt.
5.
BenganiPriyanjana. 14October2021. Advocacy groups and Metric Media collaborate on local “community news.”Tow Reports: Columbia Journalism Review. Available from https://tinyurl.com/43xh84c9.
6.
CacioppoJohn T.PettyRichard E.KaoChuan FengRodriguezRegina. 1986. Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: An individual difference perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology51 (5): 1032–43.
7.
ChongDennisDruckmanJamie. 2007. Framing public opinion in competitive democracies. American Political Science Review101 (4): 637–55.
8.
CoronelJason C.DuffMelissa C.WarrenDavid E.FedermeierKara D.GonsalvesBrian D.TranelDanielCohenNeal J.2012. Remembering and voting: Theory and evidence from amnesic patients. American Journal of Political Science56 (4): 837–48.
DarrJoshua P.HittMatthew P.DunawayJohanna L.2021. Home style opinion: How local newspapers can slow polarization. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
11.
EdgerlyStephanieXuYu. 2023. Local-level information-seeking in the COVID-19 pandemic: A repertoire approach. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (this volume).
12.
EU DisinfoLab. 2019. Influencing policymakers with fake media outlets: An investigation into a pro-Indian influence network. Available from https://tinyurl.com/ye9nv7c5.
13.
FazioRussell H.1995. Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences, and correlates of attitude accessibility. In Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences, eds. PettyRichard E.KrosnickJon A., 247–82. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
14.
GarrettR. Kelly. 2009a. Echo chambers online? Politically motivated selective exposure among Internet news users. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication14 (2): 265–85.
15.
GarrettR. Kelly. 2009b. Politically motivated reinforcement seeking: Reframing the selective exposure debate. Journal of Communication59 (4): 676–99.
16.
GodfreyElaine. 5October2021. What we lost when Gannett came to town. The Atlantic.
17.
GuessAndrew M.MungerKevin. 2023. Digital literacy and online political behavior. Political Science Research and Methods11 (1): 110–28.
18.
HopkinsDaniel J.2018. The increasingly United States: How and why American political behavior nationalized. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
19.
IyengarShantoHahnKyu S.2009. Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication59 (1): 19–39.
20.
JohnsonHollyn M.SeifertColleen M.1994. Sources of the continued influence effect: When misinformation in memory affects later inferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition20 (6): 1420.
21.
KahnKim F.KenneyPatrick J.2002. The slant of the news: How editorial endorsements influence campaign coverage and citizens’ views of candidates. American Political Science Review96 (2): 381–94.
22.
KanissPhyllis. 1991. Making local news. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
23.
KatzElihuLazarsfeldPaul F.1955. Personal influence: The part played by people in the flow of mass communications. New York, NY: Routledge.
24.
KilgoDanielle K.SintaVinicio. 2016. Six things you didn’t know about headline writing: Sensationalistic form in viral news content from traditional and digitally native news organizations. #ISOJ6 (1): 111–30.
25.
LaddJonathan M.2011. Why Americans hate the media and how it matters. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
26.
LodgeMiltonTaberCharlesVerhulstBrad. 2011. Conscious and unconscious information processing with implications for experimental political science. In Cambridge handbook of experimental political science, eds. DruckmanJames N.GreenDonald P.KuklinskiJames H.LupiaArthur, 155–70. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
27.
MahoneJessicaNapoliPhilip. 2020. Hundreds of hyperpartisan sites are masquerading as local news. This map shows if there’s one near you. Nieman Lab. Available from https://tinyurl.com/3xy2t6wb.
28.
MarkayLachlanWheatleyThomas. 6October2022. Democrats’ swing state local news ploy. Axios.
29.
MerrillJeremy B.OremusWill. 26October2021. Five points for anger, one for a “like”: How Facebook’s formula fostered rage and misinformation. Washington Post.
30.
MitchellAmyGottfriedJeffreyShearerElisaLuKristine. 2017. How Americans encounter, recall and act upon digital news. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Available from https://tinyurl.com/53m8m2tp.
31.
MoyPatriciaMcCluskeyMichael R.McCoyKelleySprattMargaret A.2004. Political correlates of local news media use. Journal of Communication54 (3): 532–46.
32.
MukerjeeSubhayanYangTian. 2021. Choosing to avoid? A conjoint experimental study to understand selective exposure and avoidance on social media. Political Communication38 (3): 222–40.
33.
MummoloJonathan. 2016. News from the other side: How topic relevance limits the prevalence of partisan selective exposure. Journal of Politics78 (3): 763–73.
34.
MungerKevin. 2020. All the news that’s fit to click: The economics of clickbait media. Political Communication37 (3): 376–97.
35.
PennycookGordonRandDavid G.2019. Fighting misinformation on social media using crowdsourced judgments of news source quality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences116 (7): 2521–26.
36.
PetersonErikAllamongMaxwell B.2022. The influence of unknown media on public opinion: Evidence from local and foreign news sources. American Political Science Review116 (2): 719–33.
37.
PetersonErikDunawayJohanna. 2023. The new news barons: Investment ownership reduces newspaper reporting capacity. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (this volume).
38.
PetersonErikIyengarShanto. 2022. Partisan gaps in political information and information-seeking behavior: Motivated reasoning or cheerleading?American Journal of Political Science65 (1): 133–47.
39.
SandsJohn. 29October2019. Local news is more trusted than national news – but that could change. Knight Foundation. Available from https://tinyurl.com/4a58wwye.
40.
ShearerElisaMitchellAmy. 12January2021. News use across social media platforms in 2020. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Available from https://tinyurl.com/dvfde28y.
41.
SparrowBartholomew H.2006. A research agenda for an institutional media. Political Communication23 (2): 145–57.
42.
StroudNatalie Jomini. 2011. Niche news: The politics of news choice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
43.
ThompsonCarol. 20October2019. Dozens of new websites appear to be Michigan local news outlets, but with political bent. Lansing State Journal.
44.
ThompsonAlex. 14July2020. Newsroom or PAC? Liberal group muddies online information wars. Politico.
45.
ThorsonEmily. 2016. Belief echoes: The persistent effects of corrected misinformation. Political Communication33 (3): 460–80.
46.
TocquevilleAlexis. 2003. Democracy in America and two essays on America. London: Penguin UK.
47.
UsherNikki. 2023. Delegitimizing rural public health departments: How decaying local news ecologies, misinformation, and radicalization undermine community storytelling networks. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (this volume).
48.
Van AelstPeterStrömbäckJesperAalbergTorilEsserFrankde VreeseClaesMatthesJörgHopmannDavidSalgadoSusanHubéNicolasStępińskaAgnieszkaPapathanassopoulosStylianosBerganzaRosaLegnanteGuidoReinemannCarstenSheaferTamirStanyerJames. 2017. Political communication in a high-choice media environment: A challenge for democracy?Annals of the International Communication Association41 (1): 3–27.
49.
WinterStephanMetzgerMiriam J.FlanaginAndrew J.2016. Selective use of news cues: A multiple-motive perspective on information selection in social media environments. Journal of Communication66 (4): 669–93.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
