The 2016 Election Mirrors Media Backlash and The Emergence of Fake News

by matthewdaniel96 on February 13, 2018 - 3:19pm

Spring 2017



This article discusses fake news and its effects following the 2016 U.S elections. More specifically, false news articles that have circulated largely through social media. It discusses the significant changes of the media and news sharing, and how new platforms for media have effected politics and elections. By the early 2000’s, the internet has provided for a variety of social platforms to share news. In more recent years, platforms like Facebook and Twitter have become the center of news consumption for many people. Recent evidence shows that 62% of grown adults receive their news on social media. In addition, the most popular fake news stories were more widely shared on Facebook than the most popular mainstream news stories.


The growth of “news” in the media wasn’t the only change that would eventually lead to the emergence of fake news. A larger presence of news on social media also brought many more public opinions on matters such as politics. The 2016 election was the most prominent example of fake news and public opinions on social media. Economics of fake news and data of its consumption prior to the elections has been discussed. False news stories that appeared in the three months before the election, those favoring Trump were shared a total of 30 million times on Facebook, while those favoring Clinton were shared 8 million times. It has been recorded that the average American adult has encountered the order of fake news stories around the time of the election. Also, a significant amount to see those stories and believe them. All connecting to show how people turn towards news of their favorable candidate as well as the presence of fake news specific to social media.





Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election.The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211-236.


Authors: Allcott, Hunt & Gentzkow, Matthew



Hunt Allcott is an associate professor of economics at New York University. He is also a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research, and a Co- Editor of the Journal of Public Economics.


Matthew Gentzkow is an American economist and a professor of economics at Stanford University. He went to Harvard University and studied in the field of microeconomics, industrial organization and political economy. During his studies, Matthew received the John Bates Clark Medal for his excellence in economic thought and knowledge.


These authors are considered reliable because of their educational background and their current work fields. These two worked together on this article which has been peer edited in addition to its completion.


This article is on the ProQuest website which is specific for academic, corporate, government, school and public libraries, as well as professional researchers. It has been peer edited and published by two researchers specializing in economics research.  Thus, making this article credible for researchers.





Before reading your article I knew very little about your subject. Of course I knew there had been questioning about fake news during the presidential of 2016. It is crazy to think how fake news can have an impact on popular opinion. It would be nice if we could know what would have happen if stories favorising Trump and Clinton would have been shared equally. Maybe the result would have been different, but maybe it would have been the same. At least, we would know who the real president should be. Your article was well written, but I am still wondering why you started your article with such a long introduction... overall it was a great summary of the article

Hi Matthew,
Your article is great; the subject you chose is really interesting and intriguing. After reading your article I made some researches about the ending of this whole fake news story during the 2016 presidentials. I quickly found out that there is actually no real ending to it; we still don't know the truth about it... Although your article is really interesting; I would have shorten the introduction a little bit, because it is easy to get mixed up when articles have a too long introduction. The structure of a text is really important for the comprehension of it that's why in a future article I would recommend you to work on this aspect. Except this little note, your article was well written and the rich vocabulary used in it makes it even better and enriching. Keep up the good work.