Fact-Checking as Mobilization and Counter-Mobilization: The Case of the Anti-Extradition Bill Movement in Hong Kong

Abstract

ABSTRACT Fact-checking has become a prominent practice in contemporary societies as fake news proliferates. While researchers have identified a variety of fact-checking practices and the possibility of fact-checking serving partisan purposes, few have examined how fact-checking is related to the dynamics of mobilization and counter-mobilization in a protest movement context. This study examined, through a content analysis, the performance of two fact-checking agencies during the Anti-Extradition Law Amendment Bill Movement in Hong Kong from 2019 to 2020. The findings show that the fact-checkers exhibited relative partisan biases through selective agenda-setting, the selective offering of explicit criticisms, and engagement in criticisms extending beyond the basic role of claim validation. However, the two fact-checkers also arguably differed in the degree of professionalism in their practice. That is, having a partisan stance does not necessarily obliterate the concerns of professionalism and credibility. Overall, this study extends our understanding of the role and performance of fact-checking in varying contexts.