ВНЕШНИЙ ОБЛИК ФЕЙКОВОГО СООБЩЕНИЯ

Introduction

There is a widespread belief that fake news is an exclusive tool and phenomenon of political sphere, but the mystification of reality is also encountered in other types of communication:

1. Fake news can be used in commercial sphere, advertisements, when promoting some companies, their goods and (or) services, brands and even some people;

2. Fake news may arise in spite of a low confidence in the authorities and (or) government agencies [3, P. 96];

3. Fake news is used as a tool for political struggle and / or for certain political views broadcasting [3, P. 96].

Discussion

S. S. Raspopova and E. N. Bogdan propose an extended typology of fake messages and highlight the following types of information products created by fake authors, which, in turn, oppose authors-creators [8]:

1. Scientific mystification (they are sensations; utilitarian in nature publications for satisfying the vital needs of people);

2. Political hoax (fake statements made by politicians who mislead the public and journalists by imitating real statements and declarations);

3. Documents hoax (fake official documents, which are often shared via the Internet or gadgets);

4. Mocumentaries (pseudo-documentary films, which imitate documentary, and include fake and falsification);

5. Journalistic hoaxes (fake journalistic reports, where the situation in question shifts into the area of an absurd set of circumstances) [2], [8].

First of all, fake is a type of lie. These are completely or partially false news messages pretending to be truthful. Taking this into account we may give 2 definitions of "fakes" and try to find the signs of inaccurate information. S. N. Ilchenko defines "fake" news as "a journalistic message containing unreliable and unverified information that does not correspond to real facts and empirical reality and is published in the media." [4, P. 26] N. F. Ponomarev believes that fakes are “media products in the format of journalistic news, but with an indefinite truth value, which are constructed by influential participants and disseminated by influential media agents to achieve political or commercial goals, legitimized by authoritative news media and are perceived by target groups as reliable news from reliable sources”. [7, P. 55]

The similarity of these definitions lies in the fact that both definitions indicate the media space as the habitat of fakes. Websites in the Internet, or any other media where news can be published are called media space. The difference lies in the fact that the second definition complements the first and says that the fake pretends to be true news.

The second difference lays between fake news - the opposition of true and false information which is usually called fact and factoid in philosophy. Recently, facts and factoids in their content have gone beyond the philosophical paradigm and began to acquire linguocultural and value connotations, as indicated by V. I. Karasik [5, p. 23]. According to the researcher, a factoid is an imitation of a fact and, as a linguocultural phenomenon, correlates with the following communicative formations: rumors, gossip, fake. Indeed, in journalism the fact always answers to the questions What? Where? When? - and its indispensable attributes are an indication of the place, time of the event and the source of information. A factoid is an unreliable or false statement, unverified, incorrect or fabricated information, which then becomes the basis for creating fake news [5, P. 24].

Fakes have their own set of features. In many cases, they are identical to the functional, structural and semantic features of the "hard" news. Hard news is the journalistic term. This is news with a loud headline [1], [8, P. 54]. It answers the questions: What? Where? How? When? Why? etc. Signs of fakes:

1. Weaving into the text of fictional events or those events, which assessment is determined by the value orientations of their distributors ("The Obama administration’s public rationale for the expulsions and closures — the harshest U.S. diplomatic reprisals taken against Russia in several decades — was to retaliate for Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election."[9, P. 63]).

2. The lack of specific names and surnames of the people who provided the information ("Both compounds, and at least some of the expelled diplomats, played key roles in a brazen Russian counterintelligence operation that stretched from the Bay Area to the heart of the nation’s capital, according to former U.S. officials.");

3. Quotations without specifying the name and position of the quote’s author ("It was a very broad effort to try and penetrate our most sensitive operations,” said a former senior CIA official");

4. Stamping ("In September 2011, Vladimir Putin announced the launch of his third presidential campaign, only to be confronted during the following months by tens of thousands of protesters accusing him of electoral fraud." [6], [10]);

5. Conclusions substitution on a specific issue and their translation into a wider geopolitical situation ("That operation was part of a larger sustained, deliberate Russian campaign targeting secret U.S. government communications throughout the United States, according to former officials" [10]);

6. Using guesses and conjectures in the situation analysis ("US intelligence officials were not sure if the Russians were able to decipher the FBI conversations in real time. But even the ability to decipher them would later give the Russians an idea of the FBI surveillance methods, including 'callsigns and locations , team composition and tactics, "said the former intelligence officer." [10]);

7. Political events of the current period discussion against the background of a wide historical context ("Mark Kelton, who served as the chief of counterintelligence at the CIA until he retired in 2015, declined to discuss specific Russian operations, but he told Yahoo News that “the Russians are a professionally proficient adversary who have historically penetrated every American institution worth penetrating”" [10]);

8. Assumption and desire to show the situation in a way favorable to opponents ("Over time, U.S. intelligence officials became increasingly concerned that Russian spies might be attempting to intercept communications from key U.S. intelligence facilities, including the CIA and FBI headquarters. No one knew if the Russians had actually succeeded.");

9. Escalating the situation and predicting the possible development of events according to a destructive scenario ("In the meantime, those familiar with Russian operations warn that the threat from Moscow is far from over. “Meanwhile, those familiar with Russian activities warn that the threat from Moscow is far from over.");

There are several strategies commonly used for spreading the fake.

First one: Initially, information is replicated in an organized way by "bots". Then it is noticed by the algorithms for the dissemination of information in social networks. They are unable to distinguish the real “viral” user interest from the artificially generated one.

 Second one: bots use social media mechanisms - hash tags and comments. This is how they attract the attention of users.

Final one: hiding the real location of users and making it appear the geographic diversity of their location.

Conclusion

Let's summarize the following:

- Fake is false news which disguises itself as real, truthful news, and thus deceives people;

- This article shows that fake has a number of characteristic features;

- In the Internet, fake news are often spread according to certain strategies.

Knowing these signs, as well as the strategies and mechanisms for spreading fake news, will help to distinguish fiction and misinformation from real news and avoid deception.

Acknowledgement

To professor of the Department «World languages and cultures», PhD in Philology, professor Matveeva Galina Grigorevna.