R0050/2026-03-31-02/Q003/SRC01/E01¶
Original report defines conceptual framework without classification procedures
URL: https://rm.coe.int/information-disorder-report-version-august-2018/16808c9c77
Extract¶
The 2017 report defines: - Three categories: Misinformation (false, no intent to harm), Disinformation (false, intent to harm), Malinformation (true, intent to harm) - Seven content types: Satire/parody, false connection, misleading content, false context, imposter content, manipulated content, fabricated content - Three phases: Creation, production, distribution - Three elements: Agent, message, interpreter
The title itself signals the framework's intended scope: "Toward an Interdisciplinary Framework for Research and Policymaking." It is explicitly positioned as a conceptual framework, not a procedural tool.
The report recommends that researchers and practitioners "move away from the term 'fake news'" and adopt the mis/dis/malinformation vocabulary. It provides analytical categories for understanding information disorder but does not provide: - Decision trees for classifying content - Scoring rubrics for assessing content type - Structured checklists for practitioners - Step-by-step classification procedures
Relevance to Hypotheses¶
| Hypothesis | Relationship | Strength |
|---|---|---|
| H1 | Contradicts | Original report is explicitly conceptual, not procedural |
| H2 | Supports | Framework provides vocabulary and analytical categories without classification procedures |
| H3 | Contradicts | Framework has been widely adopted (vocabulary-level) |
Context¶
The subtitle "Toward an Interdisciplinary Framework" uses "toward" deliberately — signaling an aspirational direction rather than a finished tool. This framing is consistent with the finding that the taxonomy remains conceptual rather than procedural.