Isaac Chun-Hai Fung1, King-Wa Fu2, Chung-Hong Chan2, Benedict Shing Bun Chan3, Chi-Ngai Cheung4, Thomas Abraham2, Zion Tsz Ho Tse5. 1. Georgia Southern University, Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Statesboro, GA. 2. The University of Hong Kong, Journalism and Media Studies Centre, Hong Kong. 3. Hong Kong Baptist University, Department of Religion and Philosophy, Hong Kong. 4. Emory University, Department of Psychology, Atlanta, GA. 5. University of Georgia, College of Engineering, Athens, GA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We analyzed misinformation about Ebola circulating on Twitter and Sina Weibo, the leading Chinese microblog platform, at the outset of the global response to the 2014-2015 Ebola epidemic to help public health agencies develop their social media communication strategies. METHODS: We retrieved Twitter and Sina Weibo data created within 24 hours of the World Health Organization announcement of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (Batch 1 from August 8, 2014, 06:50:00 Greenwich Mean Time [GMT] to August 9, 2014, 06:49:59 GMT) and seven days later (Batch 2 from August 15, 2014, 06:50:00 GMT to August 16, 2014, 06:49:59 GMT). We obtained and analyzed a 1% random sample of tweets containing the keyword Ebola. We retrieved all Sina Weibo posts with Chinese keywords for Ebola for analysis. We analyzed changes in frequencies of keywords, hashtags, and Web links using relative risk (RR) and c(2) feature selection algorithm. We identified misinformation by manual coding and categorizing randomly selected sub-datasets. RESULTS: We identified two speculative treatments (i.e., bathing in or drinking saltwater and ingestion of Nano Silver, an experimental drug) in our analysis of changes in frequencies of keywords and hashtags. Saltwater was speculated to be protective against Ebola in Batch 1 tweets but their mentions decreased in Batch 2 (RR=0.11 for "salt" and RR=0.14 for "water"). Nano Silver mentions were higher in Batch 2 than in Batch 1 (RR=10.5). In our manually coded samples, Ebola-related misinformation constituted about 2% of Twitter and Sina Weibo content. A range of 36%-58% of the posts were news about the Ebola outbreak and 19%-24% of the posts were health information and responses to misinformation in both batches. In Batch 2, 43% of Chinese microblogs focused on the Chinese government sending medical assistance to Guinea. CONCLUSION: Misinformation about Ebola was circulated at a very low level globally in social media in either batch. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of social media posts can provide relevant information to public health agencies during emergency responses.
OBJECTIVE: We analyzed misinformation about Ebola circulating on Twitter and Sina Weibo, the leading Chinese microblog platform, at the outset of the global response to the 2014-2015 Ebola epidemic to help public health agencies develop their social media communication strategies. METHODS: We retrieved Twitter and Sina Weibo data created within 24 hours of the World Health Organization announcement of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (Batch 1 from August 8, 2014, 06:50:00 Greenwich Mean Time [GMT] to August 9, 2014, 06:49:59 GMT) and seven days later (Batch 2 from August 15, 2014, 06:50:00 GMT to August 16, 2014, 06:49:59 GMT). We obtained and analyzed a 1% random sample of tweets containing the keyword Ebola. We retrieved all Sina Weibo posts with Chinese keywords for Ebola for analysis. We analyzed changes in frequencies of keywords, hashtags, and Web links using relative risk (RR) and c(2) feature selection algorithm. We identified misinformation by manual coding and categorizing randomly selected sub-datasets. RESULTS: We identified two speculative treatments (i.e., bathing in or drinking saltwater and ingestion of Nano Silver, an experimental drug) in our analysis of changes in frequencies of keywords and hashtags. Saltwater was speculated to be protective against Ebola in Batch 1 tweets but their mentions decreased in Batch 2 (RR=0.11 for "salt" and RR=0.14 for "water"). Nano Silver mentions were higher in Batch 2 than in Batch 1 (RR=10.5). In our manually coded samples, Ebola-related misinformation constituted about 2% of Twitter and Sina Weibo content. A range of 36%-58% of the posts were news about the Ebola outbreak and 19%-24% of the posts were health information and responses to misinformation in both batches. In Batch 2, 43% of Chinese microblogs focused on the Chinese government sending medical assistance to Guinea. CONCLUSION: Misinformation about Ebola was circulated at a very low level globally in social media in either batch. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of social media posts can provide relevant information to public health agencies during emergency responses.
Authors: Corey H Basch; Charles E Basch; Kelly V Ruggles; Rodney Hammond Journal: Disaster Med Public Health Prep Date: 2015-06-19 Impact factor: 1.385
Authors: Ranjan Pathak; Dilli Ram Poudel; Paras Karmacharya; Amrit Pathak; Madan Raj Aryal; Maryam Mahmood; Anthony A Donato Journal: N Am J Med Sci Date: 2015-07
Authors: Rosemary Thackeray; Scott H Burton; Christophe Giraud-Carrier; Stephen Rollins; Catherine R Draper Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2013-10-29 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Braydon J Schaible; Kassandra R Snook; Jingjing Yin; Ashley M Jackson; Jennifer O Ahweyevu; Muhling Chong; Zion Tsz Ho Tse; Hai Liang; King-Wa Fu; Isaac Chun-Hai Fung Journal: Perm J Date: 2019-07-08
Authors: Andy Wai Kan Yeung; Maria Kletecka-Pulker; Fabian Eibensteiner; Petra Plunger; Sabine Völkl-Kernstock; Harald Willschke; Atanas G Atanasov Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2021-07-09
Authors: Ivan Herrera-Peco; Beatriz Jiménez-Gómez; Carlos Santiago Romero Magdalena; Juan José Deudero; María García-Puente; Elvira Benítez De Gracia; Carlos Ruiz Núñez Journal: Vaccines (Basel) Date: 2021-06-15
Authors: Isaac Chun-Hai Fung; Ashley M Jackson; Lindsay A Mullican; Elizabeth B Blankenship; Mary Elizabeth Goff; Amy J Guinn; Nitin Saroha; Zion Tsz Ho Tse Journal: JMIR Public Health Surveill Date: 2018-04-02
Authors: Qiuyan Liao; Jiehu Yuan; Meihong Dong; Lin Yang; Richard Fielding; Wendy Wing Tak Lam Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2020-05-26 Impact factor: 5.428