OBSERVARE

Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Thematic Dossier

International Relations and Social Networks

July 2021

143

INFORMATION VERIFICATION DURING COVID-19. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

IN SOUTHERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES

RAÚL MAGALLÓN-ROSA

raul.magallon@uc3m.es

Raúl Magallón Rosa works as a professor of journalism in the Department of Communication of

Carlos III University of Madrid (Spain). He has a degree in Journalism and a Ph.D. with a

European component from Complutense University of Madrid. His research strand focuses on the

relationship between disinformation and fact-checking. He is the author of "Unfaking News. How

to fight disinformation" (also published in Portuguese) and "Disinformation and pandemic. The

new reality". (Unfaking News. Cómo combatir la desinformación" and "Desinformación y

pandemia. La nueva realidad").

JOSÉ MANUEL SÁNCHEZ-DUARTE

josemanuel.sanchez@urjc.es

He has a degree in Sociology from the University of Salamanca,

a Ph.D. in Communication from the Rey Juan Carlos University, and a Ph.D. in Social Sciences

(political specialty) from the Pontificia Universidade Católica de São Paulo. He is a Professor of

Political Communication at Rey Juan Carlos University (Spain) and Deputy Secretary General of

the Menéndez Pelayo International University.

Abstract

Disinformation poses a challenge for democracies, especially in exceptional periods such as

electoral processes but, above all, as a consequence of a global health crisis with no clear end

date. The objective of this research is to analyse the type of hoaxes identified during the

COVID-19 pandemic in southern European countries (Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece). To

this effect, 936 pieces of disinformation reported by the main verification organizations in

those countries were examined between February and August 2020: Observador and Polígrafo

(Portugal), Newtral, Maldita and EFE verifica (Spain) Facta, Open, Effecinque and Pagella

Politica (Italy) and Ellinika Hoaxes (Greece). As a final conclusion, the presence or absence of

a common pattern in the four countries is examined based on the topic of the hoaxes, their

distribution channels and how viral they spread abroad. Two axes of disinformation were

established: one health-preventive and the other in terms of political polarization.

Keywords

Disinformation, fact-checking, COVID-19, polarization, Europe.

How to cite this article

Magallón-Rosa, Raúl; Sánchez-Duarte, José Manuel. Information verification during COVID-

19. Comparative analysis in Southern European Countries. Thematic dossier International

Relations and Social Networks, July 2021. Consulted [online] on date of last visit,

https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.DT21.10

Article received on December 30, 2020 and accepted for publication on March 19, 2021

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Thematic dossier – International Relations and Social Networks (July 2021), pp. 143-156

Information verification during Covid-19. Comparative analysis in Southern European Countries

Raúl Magallón-Rosa, José Manuel Sánchez-Duarte

144

INFORMATION VERIFICATION DURING COVID-19. COMPARATIVE

ANALYSIS IN SOUTHERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES

RAÚL MAGALLÓN-ROSA

JOSÉ MANUEL SÁNCHEZ-DUARTE

1. Introduction

The crisis arising from COVID-19 has been a challenge health wise, and also regarding

economic and social terms and management of (dis)information. The objective of this

work is to analyse the hoaxes identified during the first six months of the pandemic in

southern European countries (Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece). The selection of these

countries was due to the fact that they share the same relationship pattern between the

political and media systems (Hallin and Mancini, 2004; Brüggemann et alt., 2014; Büchel

et al. 2016).

In this regard, authors such as Humprecht point out that these types of countries stand

out due to their comparatively high levels of social polarization, populist communication

and high use of social networks for news consumption. Similarly, countries in this group

tend to have lower levels of trust in the media (Humprecht et alt., 2019).

In Portugal, the first cases were registered on 2 March 2020. Two weeks later, the

government closed the border with Spain and decreed a state of emergency (between

17 and 18 March). In Spain, the first case was reported on 31 January. On 12 February,

the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona was cancelled and a month later, on 12 March,

the Government announced the first measures to stop the pandemic.

On 14 March, the state of alarm was declared alongside the lockdown of the population.

In Greece, the first case was registered on 24 February, and the closure was decreed on

23 March. Italy was the first European country hit by COVID-19. The first cases were

registered on 30 January 2020. On 8 March, the quarantine was extended to cover the

Article translated by Carolina Peralta.

This work has been carried out thanks to a Research Grant signed with The Poynter Institute for Media

Studies (“Poynter”). By accessing the #Coronavirusfacts database of the International Factckecking

Network (IFCN), we have been able to carry out this comparative study.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Thematic dossier – International Relations and Social Networks (July 2021), pp. 143-156

Information verification during Covid-19. Comparative analysis in Southern European Countries

Raúl Magallón-Rosa, José Manuel Sánchez-Duarte

145

entire Lombardy region, in addition to 14 northern Italian provinces (Peña-Ascacibar et

alt, 2021).

On 31 August 2020, 462,858 cases were confirmed in Spain, 10,317 in Greece,

269,214 in Italy and 58,012 in Portugal.

Graph 1. “Cumulative confirmed COVID-19 cases”

Source: Our World Data.

Infodemic (Nielsen et al., 2020), tsunami of misinformation or information saturation

(Tangcharoensathien et alt., 2020) are some of the concepts and problems that were

linked to media and information consumption during the first months of the COVID-19

pandemic (Brennen et al., 2020; Papapicco, 2020). From an information point of view,

these studies have had an impact on the relationship between risk communication and

communicating risk (Lozano, 2008), but also on information saturation or fatigue.

As indicated by the WHO, such fatigue can be described as: “the lack of motivation to

follow the recommended protective behaviours that appears gradually over time and is

affected by various emotions, experiences and perceptions, as well as by the social,

cultural, structural and legislative context”.

See: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/335820/WHO-EURO-2020-1160-40906-55390-

eng.pdf

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Thematic dossier – International Relations and Social Networks (July 2021), pp. 143-156

Information verification during Covid-19. Comparative analysis in Southern European Countries

Raúl Magallón-Rosa, José Manuel Sánchez-Duarte

146

It is not new that, in periods of high information intensity and unforeseen events of

indeterminate duration, citizens urgently need to expand their data and obtain details

about the events narrated in the news. What is new is that social networks, instant

messaging systems and the use of political actors who use lies as tactic and deception

as a strategy have developed an information ecosystem that is often off the radar of the

media and complementary to the latter as manager and producer of information

(Sánchez-Duarte and Magallón-Rosa, 2020a, López-Pan and Rodríguez-Rodríguez, 2020,

Vizoso & Vázquez-Herrero, 2019).

In this sense, the approach to the phenomenon of disinformation (Wardle and Derakshan,

2017) has become increasingly specialized and glocal, compared to the first research that

sought to take a still photograph of a historical event in permanent motion. Claire Wardle

and Hossein Derakhshan published a report in September (2017, 5) entitled The

Information Disorder: Towards an Interdisciplinary Framework for Research and Policy

Making, in which they stated:

We refrain from using the term ´fake news`, for two reasons. First of all, it is

woefully inadequate to describe the complex phenomenon of information

pollution. The term has also begun to be appropriated by politicians around

the world to describe news organisations whose coverage they find

disagreeable. In this way, it is becoming the mechanism by which the

powerful can clamp down, restrict, undermine and circumvent the free press.

From this point of view, it is necessary to point out that the disinformation cycle is

adaptive and linked to eventual and opportunistic niches based on confusion, media

deficiencies and information saturation.

Beyond the lack of coordination between administrations, the rise of conspiracy theories

(Uscinski et al., 2020) and the development of anti-vaccine campaigns, perhaps the most

relevant fact has been that the pandemic has acted as a catalyst for polarization in many

countries. In this sense, the first research works are showing how belonging and affinity

to certain political options is related to having a position in favour or against COVID-19

vaccination. At the same time, the first works that link polarization, disinformation and

the predisposition to vaccinate have been published (Loomba et alt., 2021).

According to Brennen's work (2020), disinformation from well-known promoters such as

politicians, celebrities, and other prominent public figures accounted for 20 percent of his

analysis but made-up 69 percent of total social media interactions. Therefore, and despite

the initial anonymity and the impossibility of often identifying the origin of hoaxes, their

extreme viral spread is caused by recognized promoters who consciously or

unconsciously spread the messages.

Authors such as Sánchez-Duarte and Magallón-Rosa (2020b) established a typology of

hoaxes that circulated in the first months of the pandemic based on four categories:

infections, status and evolution of the pandemic; forms of prevention and cures;

measures (public and private) adopted in the fight against the pandemic and to alleviate

its effects and others.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Thematic dossier – International Relations and Social Networks (July 2021), pp. 143-156

Information verification during Covid-19. Comparative analysis in Southern European Countries

Raúl Magallón-Rosa, José Manuel Sánchez-Duarte

147

Table 1. Typology of hoaxes.

Typology of hoaxes

Examples

Contagion

Condition and evolution of those infected, numbers,

contagion areas, specific situations of localities with

contagious sources, evolution of the disease, situations

of chaos, characteristics and symptoms.

Prevention

Forms and methods of prevention, cures, drugs, etc.

Measures (public and private)

adopted in the fight against the

pandemic and to mitigate its effects

Closure of spaces, control and restriction measures,

orders by government and political parties, prohibitions,

presence of the army, actions taken by companies, etc.

Other

Issues related to security (burglaries, computer security,

scams (phishing), theories about the origin of the virus,

predictions about the arrival of the pandemic,

information on specific population groups, etc.

Source: Sánchez-Duarte and Magallón-Rosa (2020b).

They also analysed the origin and distribution channels of the hoaxes (social networks,

instant messaging or the media), the intent of the hoax (deny or expand information),

their possible viral spread in other countries and whether it was possible to identify the

promoters of the hoaxes.

From this point of view, a study on southern European countries is essential for two

reasons. In the first place, because of the predominance of studies on Anglo-Saxon

countries compared to other languages and cultures and because of the traditional

polarized nature of southern European countries.

Regarding the information gap related to studies on disinformation, it should be noted

that the work by Seo and Faris (2021) highlights that 62.8% of the academic works

published between January 2015 and October 2020 were carried out with data from the

US. In quantitative terms, computational social science methods, experiments, and

surveys were the dominant approaches. The experiments accounted for 23.8% of the

articles analysed, followed by computational social science methods (18.1%), surveys

(15.2%), interviews or focus groups (14.3%), human-based or textual analysis coded

content analysis (11.4%) and meta-analysis or secondary data analysis (9.5%). Other

methods (7.7%) included image analysis, ethnography, and case studies. Thus, the

combination of methodologies for the analysis and study of fact-checking (López et alt,

2020; Freiling et alt. 2020), disinformation (Aguado and Bernaola, 2020; Apuke and

Omar, 2020) and regional characteristics and individuals from each country are essential

to conduct a comparative analysis capable of establishing analogies, relationships and,

of course, knowledge.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Thematic dossier – International Relations and Social Networks (July 2021), pp. 143-156

Information verification during Covid-19. Comparative analysis in Southern European Countries

Raúl Magallón-Rosa, José Manuel Sánchez-Duarte

148

2. Method

This research is focused on describing the disinformation identified by the verification

organizations of Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece in the first months of the COVID-19

pandemic (March- August 2020).

The choice of these countries is justified because since the beginning of the health crisis,

and with different intensities depending on the waves of contagion:

1) They share a region (southern Europe)

2) They share the relationship model of the political and media systems (Hallin and

Mancini, 2004)

3) They present different levels of incidence of the pandemic. This internal divergence

between the most affected (Spain and Italy) and the least (Portugal and Greece)

allows us to identify, in a descriptive way, the extent to which disinformation had

greater impact in situations and geographical contexts with more accentuated crises.

For the analysis, the disinformation pieces reported by fact-checking organizations from

these countries to the verification platform of the International Fact Checking Network

(IFCN)

were selected.

This network, dependent on the Poynter Institute, was created in 2015 with the aim of

“bringing together data verification initiatives by promoting and exchanging good

practices”. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the IFCN launched the #CoronavirusFacts

Alliance initiative, bringing together more than 100 verifiers from around the world to

“share, translate and publish” new coronavirus data”

In the same way, this alliance has made it possible to monitor in real time and

simultaneously - in very different countries and completely antagonistic information

cultures - how hoaxes, rumours, erroneous information, propaganda or false information

circulated. It also enabled analysing in a much more complete way how the narratives

circulated disinformation worldwide (Marin, 2020) and adapted to national, cultural and

local contexts (Naeem and Bhatti, 2020; Salaverria et alt., 2020).

Based on the IFCN database, 936 pieces of disinformation reported by the main

verification organizations in Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece were selected: Observador,

Polígrafo, Newtral, Maldita, Open, Effecinque, Facta, Pagella Politica and Ellinika Hoaxes.

The number of hoaxes in each of the countries was distributed as follows:

See: https://www.poynter.org/ifcn/ [Accessed on 09/02/2021]

See: https://www.poynter.org/coronavirusfactsalliance/ [Accessed on 09/02/2021]

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Thematic dossier – International Relations and Social Networks (July 2021), pp. 143-156

Information verification during Covid-19. Comparative analysis in Southern European Countries

Raúl Magallón-Rosa, José Manuel Sánchez-Duarte

149

Table 2: Number of pieces of disinformation in Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece between March

and August 2020

Country

Number of pieces of disinformation

Portugal

Spain

574

Italy

209

Greece

Total

936

Source: International Fact Checking Network.

After being identified, these pieces of disinformation formed a data matrix organized

according to the following variables:

- Evolution by months: hoaxes in the four countries (between March and August).

- Subject categories: authorities (information related to political or government

actions), causes, symptoms and cures (information focused on health aspects),

conspiracy theories (hoaxes that addressed the origin of the pandemic and its

management based on conspiracy theories), propagation (evolution in regions, cities,

expansion by geographical areas, etc.) and others (category with diverse and

personalized disinformation in each of the countries in the presence of celebrities,

questions about security, etc.).

- Qualification of disinformation: false (complete false disinformation) or misleading

(disinformation with aspects that did not conform to reality or half-truths).

- Degree of viral spread in other countries: disinformation replicated or not in other

countries.

Based on these variables, a descriptive analysis of the disinformation identified in the

four countries was carried out. Although this technique has certain limits, it is relevant

when exploring trends and laying the groundwork for future research.

3. Results

From the comparative analysis presented here, we can establish some clear results and

learnings. The months of March and April were the most active from the point of view of

disinformation, and consequently, of the verifications made by the fact-checkers.

In Portugal, they account for 58.4% of verifications, in Spain 57.7%, in Greece 59.6%

and the only exception is Italy where only 33.7% of verifications were recorded.

In Italy, the month of May stood out, when 29.7% of circulating hoaxes were identified.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Thematic dossier – International Relations and Social Networks (July 2021), pp. 143-156

Information verification during Covid-19. Comparative analysis in Southern European Countries

Raúl Magallón-Rosa, José Manuel Sánchez-Duarte

150

Graph 2. Evolution of disinformation by country between February and August 2020.

Source: International Fact Checking Network.

The second objective was to analyse the preferred topics during the period in question.

From the point of view of the topic categories of disinformation, those related to causes,

symptoms and cures were the most frequent in general terms. In Greece they represent

27.6% and in Portugal 25.8%.

For their part, verifications related to authorities were the most frequent in Spain and

Italy, coinciding with the fact that they were the most polarized countries during the

pandemic.

In the case of Greece, a particularity is also identified that should be examined in

subsequent studies. Up to 50.7% of the hoaxes were related to conspiracy theories.

Graph 3. Topic categories of disinformation between February and August 2020.

Source: International Fact Checking Network.

February March April May June July August

Portugal Spain Italy Greece

Authorities Causes, symptoms and cures Conspiracy theories Spreading Others

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Thematic dossier – International Relations and Social Networks (July 2021), pp. 143-156

Information verification during Covid-19. Comparative analysis in Southern European Countries

Raúl Magallón-Rosa, José Manuel Sánchez-Duarte

151

Another element of analysis was the rating, by fact-checkers, of the verified content: the

options could be divided into false or misleading. In Portugal and Spain, more than 90%

were identified as false compared to Greece and Italy, where this type of disinformation

accounted for 78.5 and 66.6%, respectively.

Graph 4. Qualification of disinformation by country between February and August 2020.

Source: International Fact Checking Network.

From the point of view of the viral spread of hoaxes in other countries, Spain clearly

stood out with 17.7% of hoaxes and Italy with 5%. Neither Greece nor Portugal identified

patterns of disinformation replicated in other countries.

Thus, Spain comes across as an exporter of hoaxes. At first this could be assumed to be

because its hoaxes are replicated in South America. However, their disinformation (in

terms of format, content, etc.) reached the whole world: China, the US, etc.

In this regard, it would be interesting to continue delving into this type of analysis to see

which categories, formats and narratives are more likely to be exported.

On the other hand, it is important to note that 34% of the hoaxes denied by all fact-

checkers in these four countries were refuted by Maldita and 20% by Newtral. Facta in

Italy with 12.7% and Elinika Hoaxes in Greece with 6.8% ranked third and fourth in

quantitative terms. This also indicates the professional attitude of these fact-checkers

within IFCN and their relevance in giving early warnings of disinformation.

100

Portugal Spain Italy Greece

False Misleading

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Thematic dossier – International Relations and Social Networks (July 2021), pp. 143-156

Information verification during Covid-19. Comparative analysis in Southern European Countries

Raúl Magallón-Rosa, José Manuel Sánchez-Duarte

152

Graph 5. Viral spread of disinformation abroad by country between February and August 2020

Sources: International Fact Checking Network.

4. Conclusions and discussion

The normalization of disinformation processes has been one of the most significant

lessons from this pandemic. During the first months, the disinformation focused on 3

main themes from a temporal point of view: the forms of contagion and cure of the virus,

the opening measures and political management of the different countries and the issue

of vaccines.

Thus, months after the pandemic and disinformation set in permanently - although with

different intensities- throughout the world, the different academic works continue to

analyse and create theories, correlations, typologies and topics of disinformation related

to COVID-19.

Our work confirms previous studies: the greater the information intensity, the greater

the disinformation (Paniagua et al., 2020). March was the month with the highest number

of hoaxes and the information that reached fact-checking organizations was mostly false.

In this context, Spain stands out, with 61.32% of hoaxes that circulated in these

countries that were verified by fact-checkers. In second place comes, Italy with 22.32%

of disinformation, Portugal with 9.4% and Greece with 6.94%.

In this regard, and as a first conclusion, it should be noted that during the first 6 months

of the pandemic, 3 out of 5 hoaxes that were denied by the fact-checkers of these four

European countries were verified by Spanish fact-checkers. According to First Draft,

17.3% of the disinformation analysed during the first six months of 2020 related to the

pandemic was in Spanish, compared to 8.8% in Portuguese.

From this perspective, those countries with the highest incidence, and also the largest in

terms of territory and population, such as Spain and Italy, were the ones that had to

deny most of the hoaxes.

100

Portugal Spain Italy Greece

Not going viral in other countries Going viral in other countries

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Thematic dossier – International Relations and Social Networks (July 2021), pp. 143-156

Information verification during Covid-19. Comparative analysis in Southern European Countries

Raúl Magallón-Rosa, José Manuel Sánchez-Duarte

153

Second, March and April were the most active months from the point of view of

disinformation. About 3 out of 5 hoaxes were refuted in Portugal, Spain and Greece

during these two months.

Third, there are two axes when identifying the topic categories of disinformation: those

related to causes, symptoms and cures were the most frequent in Greece and Portugal.

Those related to authorities were the most frequent in Spain and Italy, which were more

polarized during the pandemic. Thus, we can highlight a health-preventive axis and

another polarized political axis.

In the case of Greece, it is important to note that up to 50.7% of the hoaxes were related

to conspiracy theories.

Fourth, the qualification of the denials by fact-checkers stands out, with the options being

divided between false or misleading. In Portugal and Spain, more than 90% were

identified as false compared to Greece and Italy, where this type of disinformation

reached 78.5% and 66.6%, respectively. In this regard, it would be interesting to analyse

in detail the internal verification dynamics of fact-checkers in these countries to identify

the fact-checking cultures of this type of organization.

Fifth, and from the point of view of the viral spread of hoaxes in other countries, Spain

clearly stands out with 17.7% of hoaxes, and Italy with 5%. Neither Greece nor Portugal

had patterns of disinformation replicated in other countries.

We consider that there are two factors that helped Spain exporting hoaxes. On the one

hand, the language makes it possible to export hoaxes to Latin America and, on the other

hand, the importance of Maldita, and to a lesser extent Newtral, as fact-checkers when

it comes to refuting hoaxes at global level.

Based on these results, it could be interesting to continue delving into these typologies

to see which categories, formats and narratives are most likely to be exported.

Sixth, we should assess these data with caution as they can measure the effectiveness

of verification partnerships rather than the impact of hoax dynamics in different

countries. In this regard, it is important to note that 34.5% of the hoaxes refuted by all

fact-checkers in these four countries were disproved by Maldita and 20% by Newtral,

which indicates the relevance of these two verifiers at European level but also the

competition dynamics between them.

In conclusion, it should be noted that in Spain there has been a much higher number of

hoaxes reproduced than in other countries, because it is a country with many cultures

and it is a highly politicized country.

The data also indicates the professional stance of Spanish fact-checkers within IFCN to

place themselves as references that send early warnings of disinformation to the rest of

the organizations.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Thematic dossier – International Relations and Social Networks (July 2021), pp. 143-156

Information verification during Covid-19. Comparative analysis in Southern European Countries

Raúl Magallón-Rosa, José Manuel Sánchez-Duarte

154

5. References

Aguado-Guadalupe, G., & Bernaola-Serrano, I. (2020). Verificación en la infodemia de la

Covid-19. El caso Newtral. Revista Latina, (78), 289-308. https://doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-

2020-1478

Apuke, O.D., & Omar, B. (2020). Fake news and COVID-19: Modelling the predictors of

fake news sharing among social media users. Telemat. Inform., 101475.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7390799/

Brennen, J., Simon, F., Howard; P., & Nielsen, R. K. (2020). Types, Sources, and Claims

of COVID-19 Misinformation. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

Disponible en: https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/types-sources-and-claims-covid-

19-misinformation

Brüggemann, M., Engesser, S., Büchel, F., Humprecht, E., & Castro, L. (2014). Hallin

and Mancini Revisited: Four Empirical Types of Western Media Systems. Journal of

Communication, 64 (6), 1037–65. doi:10.1111/jcom.12127.

Büchel, F., Humprecht, E., Castro-Herrero, L., Engesser, S., & Brüggemann, M. (2016).

Building Empirical Typologies with QCA: Toward a Classification of Media Systems.

International Journal of Press/Politics, 21 (2), 209–32. doi:10.1177/1940161215626567.

Freeman, D., Waite, F., Rosebrock, L., Petit, A., Causier, C., East, A., Jenner, L., Teale,

A-L., Carr, L., Mulhall, S., Bold, E. & Lambe, S. (2020). Coronavirus Conspiracy Beliefs,

Mistrust, and Compliance with Government Guidelines in England. Psychological

Medicine. 2020, 1–13. doi:10.1017/S0033291720001890

IFCN (2017). IFCN code of principles report 2018. International Fact-Checking Network.

Available at: https://ifcncodeofprinciples.poynter.org/storage/docs/PUBLIC_VERSION-

CODE_OF_PRINCIPLES_REPORT_YEAR_1_REV_AM.pdf?v=1538242914

Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media

and politics. Cambridge University Press.

Humprecht, E., Esser, F., & Van Aelst, P. (2020). Resilience to online disinformation: A

framework for cross-national comparative research. International Journal of

Press/Politics, 25(3), 493-516.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1940161219900126

Humprecht, E. (2019). Where ‘fake news’ flourishes: a comparison across four Western

democracies. Information, Communication & Society, 22(13), 1973-1988.

https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1474241

Krause, N.M., Freiling, I., Beets, B., & Brossard, D. (2020). Fact-checking as risk

communication: The multi-layered risk of misinformatino in times of COVID-19. J. Risk

Res., 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2020.1756385

Loomba, S., de Figueiredo, A., & Piatek, S.J. (2021). Measuring the impact of COVID-19

vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA. Nat Hum Behav.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01056-1

  
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations 
e-ISSN: 1647-7251 
Thematic dossier – International Relations and Social Networks (July 2021), pp. 143-156   
Information verification during Covid-19. Comparative analysis in Southern European Countries 
Raúl Magallón-Rosa, José Manuel Sánchez-Duarte 
  
 
 
155 
López-García, X., Costa-Sánchez, C., & Vizoso, Á. (2021). Journalistic Fact-Checking of 
Information in Pandemic: Stakeholders, Hoaxes, and Strategies to Fight Disinformation 
during  the  COVID-19  Crisis  in  Spain.  Int.  J.  Environ.  Res.  Public  Health,  18,  1227. 
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18031227  
López-Pan,  F.,  &  Rodríguez-Rodríguez,  J.  (2020).  El  fact  checking  en  España. 
Plataformas, prácticas y rasgos distintivos. Estudios sobre  el  Mensaje Periodístico, 26 
(3), 1045-1065. https://doi.org/10.5209/esmp.65246 
Lozano,  J.  (2008).  La  comunicación  del  riesgo  y  el  riesgo  de  la  comunicación.  P. 
Francescutti (ed). Comunicación del riesgo. Comunicación de crisis. Dykinson. Madrid. 
Naeem S B, & Bhatti, R. (2020) The Covid-19 'infodemic': A new front for information 
professionals.  Health  Information  and  Libraries  Journal.  
https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12311  
Nielsen, R. K., Fletcher, R., Newman, N., Brennen, J., & Howard, P. (2020). Navigating 
the ‘infodemic’: how people in six countries access and rate news and information about 
coronavirus.  Reuters  Institute.  Available  at: 
https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/infodemic-how-people-six-countries-access-
and-rate-news-and-information-about-coronavirus  
Papapicco,  C.  (2020).  Informative  contagion:  The  Coronavirus  (COVID-19)  in  Italian 
journalism. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 10 (3), e202014. 
Paniagua-Rojano,  F.,  Seoane,  F.,  &  Magallón-Rosa,  R.  (2020).  Anatomía  del  bulo 
electoral: la desinformación política durante la  campaña del 28-A en España. Revista 
CIDOB  d’Afers  Internacionals,  n.º  124  (april  2020),  123-145.  DOI: 
doi.org/10.24241/rcai.2020.124.1.123  
Peña Ascacíbar, G., Bermejo Malumbres, E., & Zanni, S. (2021). Fact checking durante 
la COVID-19: análisis comparativo de la verificación de contenidos falsos en España e 
Italia.  Revista  De  Comunicación,  20(1),  197-215.  https://doi.org/10.26441/RC20.1-
2021-A11  
Sánchez-Duarte,  J.M.,  &  Magallón-Rosa,  R.  (2020a).  Aprendizajes  de  pandemia: 
desinformación  y  COVID-19.  Telos,  September,  2020. 
https://telos.fundaciontelefonica.com/aprendizajes-de-pandemia-desinformacion-y-
covid-19/ 
Sánchez-Duarte, J.M., & Magallón-Rosa, R. (2020b). Infodemia y COVID-19. Evolución y 
viralización de informaciones falsas en España.  Revista Española de  Comunicación  en 
Salud. https://e-revistas.uc3m.es/index.php/RECS/article/view/5417/3923 
Salaverría, R., Buslón, N., López-Pan, F., León, B., López-Goñi, I., & Erviti, M.-C. (2020).  
Disinformation  in times of  pandemic:  Typology of hoaxes on  Covid-19. Prof. Inf., 29, 
e290315. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.may.15  
Seo,  H.,  &  Faris,  R.  (2021).  Comparative  Approaches  to  Mis/Disinformation|  Special 
Section on Comparative Approaches to Mis/Disinformation – Introduction. International 
Journal  Of  Communication,  15,  8.  Retrieved  from 
https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/14799/3376  

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Thematic dossier – International Relations and Social Networks (July 2021), pp. 143-156

Information verification during Covid-19. Comparative analysis in Southern European Countries

Raúl Magallón-Rosa, José Manuel Sánchez-Duarte

156

Tangcharoensathien, V., Calleja, N., Nguyen, T., Purnat, T., D’Agostino, M., Garcia-Saiso,

S., Landry, M., Rashidian, A., Hamilton, C., Abdallah, A., Ghiga, I., Hill, A., Hougendobler,

D., Andel, J., Nunn, M., Brooks, I., Sacco, P., Domenico, M., Mai, P., Gruzd, A.,

Alaphilippe, A., & Briand, S. (2020). Framework for managing the COVID-19 infodemic:

Methods and results of an online, crowdsourced WHO Technical Consultation. Journal of

Medical Internet Research, 22, e19659. https://doi.org/10.2196/19659.

Uscinski, J. E., Enders, A. M., Klofstad, C., Seelig, M., Funchion, J., Everett, C., Wuchty,

S., Premaratne, K., & Murthi, M. (2020). Why Do People Believe COVID-19 Conspiracy

Theories? Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review. doi:10.37016/mr-2020-015.

Vizoso, Á., & Vázquez-Herrero, J. (2019). Plataformas de fact-checking en español.

Características, organización y método. Communication & Society, 32 (1), 127-144.

https://doi.org/10.15581/003.32.1.127-144

World Health Organization. (2020). Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV). Situation Report-

13. World Health Organization. Recuperado de https://www.who.int/docs/default-

source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200202-sitrep-13-ncov-

v3.pdf?sfvrsn=195f4010_6

Wardle, C., & Derakshan, H. (2017). Information Disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary

framework for research and policy making. Council of Europe.

https://rm.coe.int/information-disorder-toward-an-interdisciplinary-framework-for-

researc/168076277c