Abstract
In today’s digital media ecology, alternative narratives and conspiracies spread rapidly, and may undermine the legitimacy of journalism and reinforce polarized divides in society. In this setting, constructions of truth may greatly vary across established and alternative media. In this paper, we use a comparative qualitative content analysis in the US and the Netherlands to offer in-depth insights into how factual claims are legitimized and delegitimized by alternative versus mainstream media outlets. We put the assumption of post-factual relativism and alternative truths to an empirical test: To what extent and how do alternative versus established media construct irreconcilable versions of reality? When political disagreement is no longer founded on a shared reality, representative democracy may be severely damaged and vulnerable to undermining discourses of untruthfulness.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
