Abstract
The importance of the study is determined by the necessity to develop effective methods for detecting fake news to ensure societal information security, as misinformation can be used to harm at various levels, including engaging in hybrid warfare. The aim of this work is a comparative analysis of the use of digital literacy as a tool for detecting fake news in European and Kazakhstani media to determine the most effective mechanisms of counteraction. Programs and strategies for using digital literacy tools to improve media literacy among the population were analyzed. The study showed that in European countries, fact-checking and media education tools are actively used, while in Kazakhstani mass media, this approach is still in the early stages of development. It was also determined that effective cooperation between government agencies, mass media, and educational institutions plays an important role in detecting fake news, and only comprehensive interaction can lead to the formation of a truly effective mechanism for countering misinformation. The practical significance of the study lies in the fact that the obtained results can be used to develop recommendations for increasing the effectiveness of using digital literacy as a tool to combat misinformation.
In a world where information spreads at an incredible speed, the importance of a critical approach to its analysis is increasing. Studying digital literacy becomes a necessary tool for identifying and combating inaccurate information and misinformation, which can influence public opinion and even political processes. With the growth of information channels, the volume of information, its timeliness, and the speed of publication, the amount of incorrect information also increases, leading to the need to determine the most effective mechanisms for countering fake news, based on the development of digital literacy. The most characteristic problems in this area include the lack of educational programs, limited access to resources in regions, and the complexity of adapting to constantly changing technologies. Insufficient study of this topic can lead to increased misinformation, manipulation of public opinion, loss of trust in mass media and government institutions, as well as escalation of conflicts and destabilization of society.
It is of paramount importance to acknowledge the influence of media ownership on the dissemination of information and the propagation of misinformation. The concentration of media ownership frequently constrains media freedom and facilitates the manipulation of narratives by influential entities, thereby facilitating the dissemination of misinformation. Furthermore, this control impacts the implementation of digital literacy programs, as ownership influences the prioritization of content and the promotion of educational programs. In countries where media freedom is constrained, such as Kazakhstan, where government entities or a small group of private owners control the majority of media assets, initiatives to promote digital literacy and combat fake news encounter considerable obstacles. This dynamic constrains the scope and efficacy of digital literacy initiatives, which are essential for cultivating critical thinking and media analysis abilities among the general public.
The term “media freedom” is used to describe the freedom of the press and other media outlets to operate independently, without interference from governments, corporations, or other powerful entities. This freedom permits journalists to collect, publish, and disseminate information without censorship, repression, or concern for potential consequences.1 The promotion of accurate information and the combating of fake news are contingent upon the existence of media freedom. This is because it allows journalists to engage in fact-checking, investigation, and the challenging of misinformation without external pressures. In societies where media freedom is upheld, there is often a higher degree of trust in the media, as citizens are more likely to turn to sources they perceive as reliable for information. Nevertheless, media freedom is insufficient in itself; it must be accompanied by digital literacy, which encompasses the education of the public in the critical evaluation of news sources, the recognition of media biases, and the identification of misinformation. The conjunction of media freedom and a digitally literate public gives rise to a robust environment conducive to the dissemination of accurate information and a robust defense against the harmful effects of fake news.
Numerous researchers and scholars, including Kazakhstani ones, have already addressed this issue. Among them, Izekenova et al., who assessed the level of trust of Kazakhstan’s population in information sources (during the COVID-19 pandemic) and concluded that the existence of so-called “alternative media” in Kazakhstan’s media space (Telegram channels, TikTok communities, Facebook, and Instagram accounts) has led young and middle-aged users to rely heavily on social networks for information on various topics—from current news and geopolitics to explanations of various phenomena, reducing the level of control over messages and publications, providing ample space for fakes and misinformation, and significantly undermining consumer confidence in information even in official media.2 This article fairly accurately reflects the situation, but focuses on the topic of COVID-19, significantly reducing the coverage of the phenomenon as a whole.
Also, it is worth mentioning the article by Dadakhonov, which evaluates the effectiveness and impact of foreign aid in shaping media literacy in Central Asian countries.3 Analyzing programs and their results, the author provides his own recommendations for increasing the effectiveness of such programs. However, by focusing solely on the region as a whole and disregarding many national initiatives to promote media literacy, the accuracy and broader applicability of the conclusions are diminished. Markabaeva et al., among others, in their research, also touched upon the issue of the impact of fakes spread within the framework of social information on shaping the country’s image.4 This article is based on a comparative analysis of the media space of Kazakhstan, Russia, and Japan and can be used as material for further research; however, owing to global changes that have occurred in the world after 2021, many of its data should be regarded as objectively outdated or requiring clarification.
The article by Mussayeva et al. examines fact-checking methods as a mandatory element of media literacy (defining its specificity, methods), but considers this issue in the context of a journalist’s professional competence, which greatly limits the aspect of considering the problem as a whole.5 In the article by Alimzhanova et al., the audience of digital media is studied through survey analysis, its gender and geo-regional characteristics are determined, and media literacy problems are identified, but the emphasis is not on tools for recognizing fake information, but on creating quality content.6 It should be noted that the analysis of sources allows concluding about the insufficient study of the topic in the context of the latest changes from 2022 to 2024, specifically in Kazakhstan, as well as comparing its media space with that of European countries, not just Asian ones.
The aim of this work is to determine the most effective mechanisms for overcoming the problem of fake news through a comparative analysis of programs and tools for developing digital literacy used in Europe and Kazakhstan. Accordingly, this research sets the following tasks:
analyzing the use of digital literacy tools in European and Kazakhstani media, using digital literacy to detect fake news as an example;
formulating the methods used for fact-checking and information verification, their features, and effectiveness; and
identifying the role of educational programs and campaigns to increase digital literacy, describing their specifics within the framework of the Kazakhstani media space.
Materials and Methods
To achieve the set goals, several scientific methods were used. Comparative analysis was employed to study the toolkit, techniques, and strategies of fact-checking and enhancing digital literacy in European countries, as well as within international cooperation. It also helped identify how such programs could be implemented in the Kazakhstani media space. The historical method was necessary to compare past precedents of digital literacy programs in Kazakhstan. The deductive method allowed for the identification of common trends, from which specific issues relevant to the Kazakhstani media space were extracted. These included an inadequate legislative framework, lack of state support for fact-checking organizations, and insufficient adaptation of digital literacy terminology into the languages of Central Asian countries. Finally, the synthesis method combined the most characteristic properties of the Kazakhstani media space with the current system for distributing digital literacy. This provided a basis for formulating recommendations aimed at improving effectiveness based on objective reality and current trends.
As research materials, the analytical reports “Media freedom literacy round table” by Ribeiro, “Digital 2023: Kazakhstan” by Kemp, and “Misinformation on social media—Statistics & facts” by Dixon were used, providing important and up-to-date statistical measurable data on various aspects of the studied problem (indicators of trust levels in various news publication sources, levels of concern about the spread of fake information).7 In addition, the analysis of the completeness and the multiaspected nature of programs for developing digital literacy within journalistic work and the functioning of media was based on the practical guide of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) “Journalism, fake news & disinformation: Handbook for journalism education and training.”8
As a basis for analysis, European countries such as France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Finland, Italy, Ireland, Croatia, Latvia, Austria, Estonia, and the Netherlands were chosen, which adhere to both international journalism standards and information work, such as the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) initiative or the concepts of the European Platform of Regulatory Authorities’ (EPRA’s) EMIL EPRA working group on EPRA’s Media and Information Literacy MIL (), UNESCO programs, as well as having their own independent state mechanisms and strategies for combating fake news and forming digital literacy for both journalists and consumers of journalistic products. Such a comparison allowed identifying moments where international programs and initiatives work more effectively and those where national laws and regulations take precedence, which can be very useful in the context of practical application of such experience using the example of Kazakhstan. Not only norms and programs, but also fact-checking platforms and technical tools for effective fact-checking were considered (such as artificial intelligence platforms, browser plugins, software for working with different types and formats of content, and mobile applications). Most of the listed tools are accessible and often free without territorial restrictions and therefore could have already been used in relevant media literacy programs among Kazakhstani media and their audience.
Results
The role of digital literacy is increasing every year. This is especially relevant in the context of combating fake news, which poses a serious threat to democratic processes and social stability. Fake news not only deceives the public but can also lead to the escalation of conflicts, increased distrust in the media, and undermine the authority of government institutions. According to the work of Braesel and Karg, “fake news” refers to false, counterfeit, or distorted news intentionally spread to deceive, manipulate public opinion, or influence political, social, or economic processes.9 Fake news is often created and disseminated through the internet, social networks, as well as some traditional media, and can take various forms, including text, images, audio, and video materials. A quite indicative example is the annual report on the Statista website regarding internet users’ concerns about a large amount of inaccurate, fake, false, or manipulative information.10Figure 1 shows the ranking of concerns about the use of the internet for spreading incorrect information online by country (as a percentage of the total population of the country).
Figure 1 Concerns about incorrect information online
Source: Dixon. Misinformation on Social Media—Statistics & Facts (2024).
Figure 1 Concerns about incorrect information online
Source: Dixon. Misinformation on Social Media—Statistics & Facts (2024).
The issue of fake news is also closely linked to advancing software and technical equipment, making such messages as credible as possible. For example, deepfake technology (which can be used even from a regular home PC with programs like Deepfake Studio, DeepFaceLab) allows replacing the face of an avatar (an electronic image—a simulator of a real person) with the face of any politician or public figure and even simulate their voice, voicing false, untrue, and provocative statements. For this reason, in recent years, European media has been increasingly integrating principles of digital literacy into their work to counter the spread of fake news and disinformation. They adhere to strict fact-checking standards and constantly develop their methods of information verification, allowing them to respond in a timely manner to new methods of creating and disseminating fakes. Precedents from countries such as Finland, Ireland, and the Nordic countries were used to analyze the application of digital literacy tools in European and Kazakhstani media. Concepts from EPRA’s EMIL EPRA working group on MIL and UNESCO programs, which are followed by most European countries, were also considered. Additionally, initiatives from the EBU, whose recommendations are followed by Central and Eastern European countries such as Austria, Estonia, Croatia, France, Italy, the Netherlands, and Latvia, were analyzed. This analysis focused on the use of digital literacy to detect fake news.11
Finland is one of the leaders in media literacy and fact-checking. Over the past four years alone, from 2020 to 2024, various methods and programs have been implemented in the country aimed at increasing the level of digital literacy among the population and combating disinformation. Finland actively uses fact-checking platforms such as Faktabaari, which analyze public statements and news for their accuracy. Many Finnish media outlets are integrating specialized fact-checking departments into their work and participating in international networks such as the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) to exchange experiences and methods of information verification. Information campaigns are regularly conducted in the country to raise awareness of the importance of critically approaching information on the internet and the ability to distinguish reliable sources from unreliable ones. Educational programs on media literacy for schoolchildren and students are being introduced, including the study of critical thinking, media content analysis, and understanding the mechanisms of media operation. Online resources and platforms for self-education in media literacy are being created, available to a wide range of users. An example is the DIL (Digital Information Literacy) program, the NORDIS program of the European Digital Media Observatory (EDMO), and the Faktabaari DIL guide published in 2022.12
In Ireland, measures are also being taken to increase levels of media literacy and combat disinformation. Irish media and fact-checking organizations, such as TheJournal.ie, actively cooperate with international networks, including the IFCN, to exchange best practices and information verification standards. Technological solutions, such as artificial intelligence algorithms, are regularly developed and applied to automate the processes of identifying and analyzing potentially unreliable information. Media literacy is included in the curricula of schools and higher education institutions to teach young people critical analysis of media content and develop skills for responsible consumption of information. In addition, courses and seminars are held for the public and online platforms and applications are created, providing access to educational materials on media literacy and fact-checking for various age groups. Nonprofit organizations, such as Media Literacy Ireland, play a key role in coordinating efforts to increase media literacy among the population and conduct information campaigns in the country, although the government also participates in these initiatives.13 An example is the BE SMART campaign (active since 2019), which urges people to “stop, think, and check,” promoting the use of critical thinking not only for the internet segment but also for messages in all media.14
A significant role in the development of media literacy and fact-checking in Central and Eastern European countries, including Austria, Estonia, Croatia, France, Italy, the Netherlands, and Latvia, is played by the EBU. It provides its members with recommendations on fact-checking and information verification, including methods for assessing source reliability and content analysis techniques, and fosters cooperation among national broadcasters in the field of fact-checking and media literacy by organizing seminars, conferences, and joint projects. The EBU supports the development and implementation of educational programs on media literacy for schoolchildren and adults aimed at developing critical thinking skills and media analysis skills, initiates information campaigns, and publishes materials aimed at raising public awareness of the importance of media literacy and ways to recognize disinformation. It also provides its members with access to educational materials, tools, and resources that help broadcasters integrate media literacy principles into their programs and content and finances and coordinates research in this area, the results of which are used to develop new strategies and programs.15
It is worth noting the existence of separate national practices and strategies for implementing media literacy. For example, the Austrian Broadcasting Corporation actively participates in educational initiatives and conducts special programs and projects on media literacy.16 In Belgium, the European Journalism Training Association, which later became an international association, was created, which launched the EUFACTCHECK fact-checking project.17 In Africa, the “What’s crap on WhatsApp?” podcast actively operates, which exposes fakes spread within the popular messenger WhatsApp and is funded by organizations such as Africa Check, Volume, and the IFCN.18 The Estonian National Broadcasting Corporation supports initiatives on media literacy and creates educational content aimed at developing critical thinking.19 In Croatia, educational programs and campaigns aimed at increasing media literacy among the population are conducted by Croatian Radio and Television, and in France, this is actively done by France Televisions and Radio France.20 The Netherlands Public Broadcasting is actively involved in educational initiatives and promotes media literacy through its programs, while Italian Radio Television organizes educational projects and broadcasts special programs on media literacy.21 In Latvia, media literacy campaigns are supported by Latvian Television and Latvian Radio, which also create relevant educational content.22 Overall, state media in these countries play an important role in developing media literacy by creating quality educational content, conducting awareness campaigns, and collaborating with educational institutions and organizations.
One cannot overlook the role of EPRA, which establishes norms for determining media literacy in the field of media freedom, focusing on coordinating resources and developing networks of cross-border cooperation in this area. UNESCO carries out regular actions and events, such as the thematic conference of the Global Media and Information Literacy Week 2022, creates Youth Forums, contributes to the adoption of various declarations, such as the Abuja Declaration on Global MIL Financing, aimed at combating disinformation and building trust, and implements basic principles of using the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to develop information and media literacy.23
It makes sense to provide several specific examples of fact-checking organizations and services that have shown the greatest effectiveness in the European media space. For example, Reality Check—BBC: The fact-checking arm of the British Broadcasting Company (BBC), which checks claims made in news and social media and explains the facts behind popular stories.24 It helps the audience distinguish between truthful information and disinformation. The previously mentioned Faktabaari (Finland)—an independent fact-checking portal that verifies claims made by politicians and the media for their accuracy. Faktabaari also conducts educational programs on digital literacy and fact-checking for schoolchildren and students. Another example is the section on the Le Monde newspaper’s website, Decoders (France), which specializes in fact-checking and explaining complex topics.25 Decoders use digital tools and data analysis methods to verify information and teach the audience critical thinking. The Italian fact-checking site Political Report Card, which verifies claims made by politicians and public figures for their truthfulness.26 Political Report Card also participates in educational projects aimed at increasing digital literacy among citizens. The independent journalistic agency Correctiv (Germany), which conducts investigations and fact-checking, as well as develops educational programs and resources for schoolchildren and teachers to increase media literacy and critical thinking.27 One can also mention FactCheck.org, one of the oldest fact-checking sites, which verifies claims made by American politicians and public figures. Or Full Fact, a British nonprofit organization that fact-checks claims made in public discourse, including in the media and political speeches.28 This is certainly not an exhaustive list, but it is quite illustrative within the scope of this research. It is also worth mentioning the fact-checking tools used, the most popular of which are listed in Table 1.
Table 1 Tools for Fact-Checking and Identifying Fake News
Name | Tool type | Functional |
Hoaxy | Service, phone application | A tool for visualizing the spread of information and disinformation on social networks |
Teeneye | Image search service | A reverse image search tool that helps to verify the source and distribution history of images online |
InVID | Browser plugin | A plugin designed to check videos and images for their authenticity and source |
Deepware Scanner | Video analysis service | A deepfake detection tool that analyses videos for signs of manipulation |
CheckMedia | AI (artificial intelligence) | A fact-checking and media analysis platform that uses artificial intelligence to identify misinformation |
FakeCheck | AI (artificial intelligence) | A social media news verification tool that analyses content and sources |
ClaimBuster | A resource for working with live broadcasts and broadcasts | A tool for automatically identifying verifiable facts in news texts and speeches |
NewsGuard | Browser plugin | A plugin that evaluates the credibility of news sites and provides the user with a reliability rating |
MediaBugs | Platform | A platform for tracking and correcting errors in news journalism |
Botometer (formerly BotOrNot) | Web application | A tool for assessing the activity and likelihood that a social media account is a bot |
SurfSafe | Browser plugin | A plugin that helps identify fake images and check their origin |
Fandango | Video analysis program | A tool for analyzing video and determining editing or other manipulations |
RevEye Reverse Image Search | Browser plugin | A plugin that allows performing reverse image searches in multiple search engines simultaneously |
SPEAKEASY | Program for analyzing speech and audio recordings | A tool for analyzing speech and identifying manipulation or changes in audio recordings |
Logically | Platform based on piece intelligence | A platform that uses artificial intelligence to identify and analyze disinformation and fake news |
Name | Tool type | Functional |
Hoaxy | Service, phone application | A tool for visualizing the spread of information and disinformation on social networks |
Teeneye | Image search service | A reverse image search tool that helps to verify the source and distribution history of images online |
InVID | Browser plugin | A plugin designed to check videos and images for their authenticity and source |
Deepware Scanner | Video analysis service | A deepfake detection tool that analyses videos for signs of manipulation |
CheckMedia | AI (artificial intelligence) | A fact-checking and media analysis platform that uses artificial intelligence to identify misinformation |
FakeCheck | AI (artificial intelligence) | A social media news verification tool that analyses content and sources |
ClaimBuster | A resource for working with live broadcasts and broadcasts | A tool for automatically identifying verifiable facts in news texts and speeches |
NewsGuard | Browser plugin | A plugin that evaluates the credibility of news sites and provides the user with a reliability rating |
MediaBugs | Platform | A platform for tracking and correcting errors in news journalism |
Botometer (formerly BotOrNot) | Web application | A tool for assessing the activity and likelihood that a social media account is a bot |
SurfSafe | Browser plugin | A plugin that helps identify fake images and check their origin |
Fandango | Video analysis program | A tool for analyzing video and determining editing or other manipulations |
RevEye Reverse Image Search | Browser plugin | A plugin that allows performing reverse image searches in multiple search engines simultaneously |
SPEAKEASY | Program for analyzing speech and audio recordings | A tool for analyzing speech and identifying manipulation or changes in audio recordings |
Logically | Platform based on piece intelligence | A platform that uses artificial intelligence to identify and analyze disinformation and fake news |
Source: Compiled by the authors.
Table 1 provides an overview of the most widely used fact-checking tools, which are integral to combating fake news. These tools, including Hoaxy, InVID, and ClaimBuster, are of great importance in the verification of information across a range of media formats, including text, images, and videos. Although these tools are currently employed extensively in European media, there is an opportunity to adapt and implement them more effectively in the Kazakhstani context.
To illustrate, Hoaxy, a tool that visualizes the dissemination of information on social media, could prove particularly beneficial in Kazakhstan, where platforms such as Instagram and Telegram have emerged as significant sources of news.29 By mapping the dissemination of misinformation across these networks, media outlets and fact-checking organizations could identify areas of heightened risk and direct their counter-disinformation campaigns accordingly. Similarly, InVID, a browser plugin used for video and image verification, is of particular importance in a region where the prevalence of deepfakes and manipulated images is on the rise. In light of the growing prevalence of visual media in shaping public opinion, there is a clear need for local fact-checking organizations such as Factcheck.kz to employ tools like InVID in authenticating the visuals used in news reports and social media posts. ClaimBuster, which automates the identification of verifiable claims in live broadcasts, could be integrated into Kazakhstan’s newsrooms, particularly during political events where misinformation is often prevalent. This tool could facilitate the process of fact-checking political speeches or public statements in real-time, thereby increasing the speed at which false claims are addressed.30
In order to ensure the effective integration of these tools into Kazakhstan’s media landscape, it is essential that there is collaboration between government agencies, media organizations, and educational institutions. As previously indicated in the Results section, the restricted number of autonomous fact-checking platforms and the absence of a comprehensive legislative framework represent considerable obstacles. These tools can serve as a foundation for the development of a comprehensive media literacy and fact-checking ecosystem, supported by legislation that encourages their use in both professional and public spheres.
Within the scope of this study, it did not make sense to include tools for narrow specialists, such as technical language models for search engines or systems like Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) (bidirectional encoder for extracting context meaning from sentences and identifying patterns).31 As shown in Table 1, there is quite a wide variety of tools designed for fact-checking, including checking facts, images, audio and video files, content analysis, and source credibility rating. Moreover, these tools are available to the public, often completely free, and can be used not only on specialized equipment but also on regular home computers, tablets, or phones, which significantly facilitates the fact-checking process.
Most European countries promote media self-regulation, including fact-checking, create numerous educational and popularizing media literacy programs, encourage the role of the media in strengthening consumer trust in information and increasing their media literacy, promote understanding of a healthy ecosystem of digital and analog media, and enhance international partnership in the field of media literacy.32 However, alongside the merits and advantages, there are also objective drawbacks that should be taken into account. Among such disadvantages, the limited coverage deserves separate mention (despite the presence of progressive programs, they often don’t cover the entire population, especially in remote or underprivileged areas), insufficient funding (many initiatives face limitations in funding, which hinders their expansion and improvement of quality), heterogeneous approaches (different countries and organizations may have different approaches to media literacy and fact-checking, making it difficult to create unified standards and exchange experiences), lack of in-depth analysis (some programs and initiatives focus on basic media literacy skills without delving into more complex aspects of critical thinking and information analysis), technological barriers (some users, especially the elderly, may have difficulties using digital tools and platforms), challenges in assessing effectiveness (measuring the impact of media literacy and fact-checking programs can be a challenging task, making it difficult to improve and justify funding), and lack of trained specialists (some countries may lack qualified teachers and trainers capable of effectively conducting media literacy programs).33 Also, problems with regular updates should not be overlooked, as programs may quickly become outdated in the rapidly changing information landscape if they are not consistently revised. Moreover, resistance or critical perception from certain groups, including political organizations or activists who view some measures as excessive or biased, can exacerbate issues. This includes the politicization of efforts to address fake and misleading information and implement strategies for its elimination.34 A significant role may also be played by information overload, as an excessive abundance of information and resources on media literacy can cause confusion and overload among users. To address these shortcomings, constant updating and adaptation of programs are necessary, as well as strengthening cooperation between governments, educational institutions, and nongovernmental organizations.
In 2019, Akoyeva et al. conducted a study on trust in various types of media in Kazakhstan.35 The sociological survey was conducted from July to October 2018 and aimed to determine the level of trust among Kazakhs in various media outlets, including electronic ones. The results of this study demonstrated significant changes in information dissemination channels. Thus, if at the end of the twentieth century, the main sources of news in Kazakhstan were radio, newspapers, and television, then at the beginning of the 2000s, the internet became the main source of news, the popularity of which continues to grow. Currently, according to this study, television remains the main source of news and information, while news websites and social networks firmly occupy the second position. Figure 2 vividly illustrates the level of trust among the population in various types of information sources.
Figure 2 Results of the survey “Do you trust the listed sources of information?”
Source: Political Report Card.
Figure 2 Results of the survey “Do you trust the listed sources of information?”
Source: Political Report Card.
As seen in the graph, 86% of people trust television to some extent, 83% trust news websites, and 76% trust print media. The relatively low levels of distrust in various types of media at this level indicate a wide opportunity for the dissemination and spread of fake news. However, the same study also indicated that 53% of respondents believe that websites present events in a paradigm favorable to certain groups of people, 55% believe that internet resources are used to create a positive image of specific individuals, 47% claim that websites distract the audience from serious issues, and 45% define internet information as the imposition of a certain opinion on readers. Even with such indicators of noncomplimentary evaluation, a significant portion of respondents, 35%, are confident that informational websites are not used to manipulate public opinion and spread knowingly false information. This indicator clearly demonstrates the insufficiently high level of media literacy among the population of Kazakhstan. Given the results of numerous studies, it can be argued that the understanding of the possibility of obtaining inaccurate, incorrect, or manipulative information is the basis of the desire and motivation to acquire digital literacy, and the absence of such understanding significantly affects the effectiveness of any educational programs aimed at this sphere.36
As of 2023 and the beginning of 2024, media literacy and fact-checking in Kazakhstan continue to develop but face a number of characteristic problems. Although there are initiatives to increase media literacy in the country, they are often limited to major cities such as Astana and Almaty, while access to media literacy resources in rural areas may be limited. Additionally, insufficient attention is given to the development of media literacy skills and critical thinking in school and university curricula, hindering the formation of citizens’ ability to critically evaluate information. This is further compounded by a lack of trained specialists in the field of media literacy and fact-checking, which slows down the development of these areas.
As of 2023 and the beginning of 2024, the development of media literacy and fact-checking in Kazakhstan continues, although these fields still encounter the typical challenges associated with their growth. Initiatives to enhance media literacy are frequently constrained to major urban centers, such as Astana and Almaty. Conversely, access to media literacy resources in rural areas remains constrained. The integration of digital literacy into the school curriculum is still in its infancy. Recent studies, such as that conducted by Katyetova, indicate that while there are nascent efforts to incorporate media literacy into the school curriculum, it has not yet become a pervasive or standardized component of the national educational framework.37 As indicated in a recent report, approximately 25% of the educational institutions in Kazakhstan have implemented comprehensive digital literacy programs, predominantly in urban areas where infrastructure and access to digital tools are more readily available.
Furthermore, digital literacy education in Kazakhstani schools is frequently not a priority. When it is included, the programs tend to focus on basic computer skills rather than critical aspects such as media literacy, cybersecurity, or the identification of misinformation. In a comparative study of digital literacy education in Central Asia, Kazakhstan is found to lag behind countries like Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan in incorporating these elements into school curricula.38
In Kazakhstan, the ownership structure of media outlets exerts a profound influence on the fight against misinformation and the promotion of digital literacy. Media organizations that are subject to significant influence from political or economic elites may be disinclined to engage in fact-checking or the promotion of media literacy programs that could potentially reveal misinformation aligned with their interests.39 Furthermore, the limited number of independent media outlets serves to exacerbate this situation, thereby hindering the efficacy of digital literacy programs. Conversely, countries with a more diverse and independent media ownership structure, such as Finland and Ireland, have been able to implement more robust digital literacy programs, which have contributed to a higher level of public trust in the media and a more effective fight against fake news.
It is worth noting that in Kazakhstan, there are a limited number of independent fact-checking platforms, such as the Legal Media Center, a nongovernmental organization focusing on media rights in Kazakhstan (the center receives a grant from the Central Asia Media Program funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), aimed at training journalists and law students, including aspects of fact-checking); however, they often have to severely limit their activities owing to lack of resources. For this reason, journalists often face difficulties in fact-checking information owing to the unavailability of reliable sources and data. Another problem is the significant influence of social networks in disseminating information in Kazakhstan, which contribute to the spread of fake news and misinformation and have not received sufficient legal regulation regarding the accuracy and correctness of published data. This is despite the fact that, according to data in Kemp’s report, in January 2023, Kazakhstan had 11.85 million social media users, equivalent to 60.8% of the total population.40 It is also important to mention that the political and economic situation in the country often affects the freedom of the media and access to independent journalism, which in turn hinders the development of media literacy and fact-checking. As an example, a new law passed by President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev in 2023 very strictly regulates the activities of journalists and bloggers, providing for large fines for spreading “fake news” on the internet (Article 456-2 of the Code of Administrative Offences) without specifying the mechanism and criteria for determining the accuracy of online content, effectively creating the possibility of introducing state censorship.41
While fact-checking in Kazakhstan is in a nascent state, it is worth noting the existence of positive trends.42 For example, fact-checking platforms are already successfully operating in the Kazakhstani media space, such as Factcheck.kz, one of the most well-known platforms in Kazakhstan, which verifies facts and misinformation, MediaCheck.kz, a platform that analyses Kazakhstani media for accuracy and reliability of information, and StopFake.kz—part of the international StopFake network, specializing in identifying and debunking fake news related to Kazakhstan and the Central Asian region. Additionally, with financial support from the Committee on Science of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan, numerous scientific and applied research studies are being conducted under the project “Development of an Information Resource in the Field of Digital Literacy to Identify Indicators of False Information and Disinformation in Kazakhstan,” demonstrating active participation of governmental institutions in developing media literacy among the population. The MediaNet International Journalism Center, in collaboration with Internews, has released a media literacy textbook for students in grades 9–11. The manual was created by a team of media specialists from Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, and Lithuania and includes chapters on cybersecurity, combating fake news, and teaches the use of information analysis and verification tools.43
Moreover, various programs, forums, and events aimed at increasing media literacy among the population are held in Kazakhstan. For example, the MediaSapar educational program, organized by the Soros-Kazakhstan Foundation, aims to develop media literacy skills among youth and teachers in Kazakhstan’s regions; the regular Digital Kazakhstan international forum, where experts, government representatives, and business leaders discuss issues of digitalization and media literacy; the “MediaQuest” project—an interactive educational program for schoolchildren and students, which includes media quests, workshops, and training sessions on media literacy and critical thinking; and conferences such as the “Media and Information Literacy for All” conference organized by the Association of Journalism Schools of Kazakhstan, aimed at discussing strategies and methods for increasing media literacy in the country. It is also worth mentioning the handbook for students authored by Muratova et al., which, among other useful information, includes a practical section with analysis of real cases using the most effective fact-checking methods and tools and recommendations on how to apply them.44 Various nonprofit organizations and educational centers regularly hold media camps and training sessions for youth and journalists aimed at developing media literacy skills, fact-checking, and creating quality content.
Furthermore, many developed countries provide assistance to the Central Asian region, including Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America. International organizations such as USAID, UNESCO, Deutsche Welle Academy, and the European Union also regularly hold events and conferences and provide grants for the development of independent projects.45 Among such initiatives are the international project “Media and Information Literacy in the Digital World: How to Educate Teachers” initiated and implemented in 2020 by the UNESCO Institute for Information Technologies in partnership with the Eurasian Association of Pedagogical Universities, the project “Implementation of UNESCO International Journalism Standards in the Context of the Strategic Priorities of the Bologna Process in Kazakhstan” aimed at analyzing the Kazakh media sphere based on international indicators and developing proposals for further improving the situation in the country, funding for the organization Equal Rights & Independent Media, which works on promoting media literacy in Moldova, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tunisia, and six European countries, and the Central Asian Media Program MediaCAMP 19, which, among other tasks, aims to increase media and information literacy among youth and adults and increase the number of literate information consumers and providers in Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan.46
A significant contribution to the development of media literacy in the Central Asian region, including Kazakhstan, significantly loses its effectiveness owing to the absence of a targeted government policy aimed at developing this sector, the lack of scientifically grounded concepts adapted to the local socio-political and cultural context, insufficient terminology in national languages, and often difficulties in choosing criteria for assessing the state of media literacy in each specific region, even within the boundaries of one country. Additionally, it is important to consider that the effectiveness of international assistance significantly decreases owing to a number of factors, starting from the lack of necessary systems and structures for effective management and implementation of foreign aid and ending with corruption.
Thus, it can be logically concluded that the situation with media literacy and fact-checking in Kazakhstan should be assessed in the context of the specific characteristics of the Central Asian region, including the lack of stable traditions of quality independent media, insufficiently progressive and democratic policies of the governments of the region, and a whole range of factors that reduce the effectiveness of international assistance in creating institutions and mechanisms of media literacy among the general population.
Discussion
Within this study, a significant amount of information for analysis was obtained from the article by Dadakhonov, analyzing the types, forms, volumes, and effectiveness of international assistance in shaping media literacy in Central Asian countries.47 The results of this analysis were quite indicative in assessing the influence of international aid and its real impact on the state of the media sphere in the countries of this region. However, the article does not sufficiently examine the characteristic features of each individual country. The author claims that political institutions and social structures have a significant influence on both media literacy indicators and the success of implementing international programs aimed at its formation and enhancement.
In the article by Koh and Baek, the influence of traditional and social networks on public trust (using Kazakhstan as an example) is examined.48 This study demonstrates how low the level of awareness among Kazakhs is regarding the potential use of social networks and the internet in general for spreading fake and incorrect news. However, this article may already be considered outdated owing to significant changes in the global geopolitical situation. The intensification of propaganda activities by the Russian Federation and China in the Central Asian region has also contributed to these changes. As a result, there has been a growing trust in these information sources among the population. Additionally, the intensity of fake news circulating on social networks has increased.
The study by Omar et al. is dedicated to examining the motivation of users and other factors in the online environment, as well as the influence of awareness of fake news on the intensity of its dissemination.49 The authors identified the dominance of the attractiveness of the online environment over the motivation of users themselves (namely, trust in the social network itself, norms of reciprocity, and attractiveness of creating social connections), as well as that high awareness of fake news negatively affects the intensity of the dissemination of such incorrect information.
The article by Kurambayev and Myssayeva, aimed at analyzing such a specific aspect of disinformation as the study of the use of fictional names (pseudonyms) among journalists in Central Asia, may represent significant scientific interest.50 In addition to the direct use of pseudonyms as a means of self-defense in conditions of censorship and threats to the journalist’s life, the author also touches on the topics of the influence of such pseudonyms on the level of trust in journalistic publications and the necessity, sometimes for the same purpose of self-defense, to change or present some facts not quite correctly (naming names of individuals or places where the described events took place), which may be perceived as intentional distortion of information and thus fall under the definition of fake news, especially in conditions of not-quite precise Kazakhstani legislation. This direction did not continue in this study; however, the issues raised still deserve further study in the context of their influence on fact-checking and the formation of understanding of news fakeness as such, defining criteria of media literacy in the conditions of the Kazakhstani political and social structure. The study by Akoyeva et al. presents the results of a survey on the topic of trust in various types of media in Kazakhstan, which represents significant scientific interest and complements the information base of this study.51 However, it is worth considering the fact that the data provided refers to 2019, and over the past, the situation has changed significantly (although it has retained its basic characteristic trends, owing to which the provided information was successfully implemented in this study).
In the article by Ahmed, dedicated to the phenomenon of mitigating the effects of disinformation and fake news through news literacy, the author examines the specifics of how young information consumers apply practical news literacy skills to identify incorrect information.52 This contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of how certain behavioral models within news literacy can minimize the creation, impact, and further dissemination of fake news. This study, exhaustive, thorough, and quite relevant (as it was conducted in the second half of 2023), however, was based on the United Arab Emirates. It seems entirely appropriate to use the template of this study to conduct a similar one, but only within the territory of Kazakhstan or at least in the countries of the Central Asian region. The knowledge obtained in this way could more fully address the question of applying the acquired media literacy skills, which has received little attention in the scientific community focused on analyzing the Kazakhstani media sphere, as well as to refine and implement the most effective fact-checking tools and methods.
The results of the study by Young et al., dedicated to examining fact-checking tools, their effectiveness, and the completeness of their functionality, can also be quite important in this regard.53 The materials obtained can be used in the future to analyze the effectiveness of such tools and fact-checking platforms in the Kazakhstani media space, as well as to create a more qualitative and effective toolkit. It seems expedient to recommend compiling a similar analytical report based on existing fact-checking techniques and tools, as well as creating, based on the obtained results, more progressive and user-friendly platforms and plugins that would allow even low-computer literate users from Kazakhstan to verify information. Weideman’s research focuses on the role of search engines in the dissemination, masking, and detection of fake news.54 Although the topic of this article is narrow and quite specific, it is worth mentioning separately because most media literacy programs implemented in Kazakhstan do not pay enough attention to purely technical aspects related to the functioning of fake news within search engine algorithms, although often these algorithms allow both effectively masking and detecting even very high-quality fakes and forgeries.
The research by Bengtsson and Johansson examines the specifics of news in the digital environment, which is also an approach not typical for Kazakhstani scholars in terms of dividing fakes in the context of different channels of their creation, dissemination, and presentation, indicating the need to fill this gap in scientific knowledge.55 The empirical study conducted by Çoksan and Yilmaz revealed a correlation between the content of fake news and the possibility of its detection and recognition through analytical and logical thinking.56 Also, within this study, fake news was divided into six subgroups based on the principle of “ours-others” (such as a fake attacking an alien group, praising one’s own group). This study is of scientific interest; however, it needs further clarification and testing on other audiences to confirm the objectivity of such conditional division.
Thus, it can be argued that the mentioned studies form an extensive basis, including the results of reports and specialized research, references to historical precedents, and current digital literacy enhancement programs. However, they also identify a number of problems, primarily related to insufficient analysis of the specificity of the Central Asian region and the peculiarities of the thinking of the local population, as well as such characteristics such as limited media literacy and a lack of understanding of the need to acquire fact-checking skills. The studies discussed here also point out existing deficiencies in the scientific base aimed at studying these aspects in the Kazakhstani space (such as the lack of analysis of the effectiveness of using already-acquired media literacy skills), indicating the prospects and opportunities for further scientific research. Therefore, these studies should be considered as foundational material for further analysis of the questions posed, requiring updating and supplementation considering the specifics of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
In order for digital literacy programs to have a lasting impact, it is vital that they are sustained over time.57 This can be achieved by ensuring that they receive continuous funding, that they provide ongoing education, and that they adapt to new technologies. It is imperative that these programs are provided with continuous funding, as this will ensure their continued operation and expansion, particularly in regions that are currently underserved. In the absence of reliable financial backing, numerous initiatives may prove unable to expand or may only survive for brief periods. Furthermore, the provision of ongoing education is of paramount importance in ensuring the continued relevance of digital literacy. The rapid evolution of the digital landscape necessitates the adaptation of digital literacy programs to ensure that both instructors and participants remain informed about the latest trends and tools. This encompasses the provision of opportunities for educators to enhance their competencies and the introduction of novel digital tools that are consistent with contemporary media consumption patterns.
Ultimately, the ability to adapt to new technologies is essential for the continued efficacy of digital literacy programs. In light of the evolving landscape of misinformation techniques, such as the advent of deepfakes and AI-generated content, it is imperative that digital literacy programs incorporate cutting-edge tools and methodologies for detection and prevention. Such adaptability ensures that the literacy program can effectively counter the latest disinformation strategies, thus equipping both the general public and media professionals with the tools needed to navigate the digital space responsibly.
Conclusions
Digital literacy is a key factor in combating fake news and maintaining social stability. Fake news, deliberately disseminated to manipulate public opinion, poses a serious threat to democracy, and can lead to escalation of conflicts and undermining trust in the media and governmental institutions. Advancing technologies, which make fakes more believable, further intensify the need for the development of digital literacy methods and information verification. Examples from countries like Finland, as well as initiatives from international organizations such as UNESCO, demonstrate effective approaches to enhancing media literacy and combating disinformation, which should be further implemented in other geopolitical contexts, including the Central Asian region.
The aim of the research, which involved comparing methods for combating fake news in European and Kazakhstani media, was fully achieved. As a result, it was found that compared to European countries, the countries of the Central Asian region significantly lag behind in implementing fact-checking practices. Despite some positive trends, Kazakhstan faces a number of problems in the field of media literacy and fact-checking, including limited coverage of initiatives, insufficient attention in educational programs, and the constraining influence of political and economic factors on media freedom.
As the most relevant recommendations, it seems appropriate to suggest increasing the coverage and accessibility of media literacy programs, especially in regions beyond major cities, standardizing existing legislation in the field of information regulation, and conducting informational campaigns to raise awareness of the importance of critical thinking regarding online information. The most relevant directions for further research could include a detailed analysis of the effectiveness of current digital literacy programs in Kazakhstan and other countries, analyzing the use of already-acquired fact-checking skills, and determining how the political and economic situation affects the development of media literacy and media freedom in Kazakhstan. The results of these studies are expected to significantly improve the effectiveness of all educational initiatives within the analyzed theme.
Funding
This research has been funded by the Science Committee of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Grant No. AP19679909 “Development of information resource in the sphere of digital literacy to identify indicators of incorrect information and disinformation in Kazakhstan”).
Notes
G. Arginbekova, S. Amitov, Y. Dulatov, K. Bakbergen, and R. Kyndybayeva, “The Transformation of Spiritual Consciousness in Modern Conditions,” Scientific Herald of Uzhhorod University. Series Physics 55(2024): 2285–94, https://doi.org/10.54919/physics/55.2024.228wd5.
A. K. Izekenova, A. E. Bukharbayeva, B. S. Zhussupov, L. Z. Alekesheva, M. A. Erdenova, B. A. Iskakova, A. K. Myrkassymova, A. K. Izekenova, K. B. Karibayev, and G. A. Mergenova, “Assessing the Trust of the Population of Kazakhstan in Sources of Information During the Pandemic COVID-19,” Science & Healthcare 24, no. 2 (2022): 15–23.
A. O. Dadakhonov, “The Effectiveness of Foreign aid in the Sphere of Media and Information Literacy in Central Asian Countries,” Advances in Journalism and Communication 12, no. 1 (2024): 48–72, https://doi.org/10.4236/ajc.2024.121003.
G. T. Markabaeva, A. M. Zhusupova, and G. S. Sultanbaeva, “The Role of Social Information in the Formation of the Country’s Image: A Comparative Analysis (On the Example of Kazakhstan, Russia and Japan),” Bulletin of L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University, Journalism Series 135, no. 2 (2021): 20–26, https://doi.org/10.32523/2616-7174-2021-135-2-20-26.
B. A. Mussayeva, N. Guz, and N. T. Shyngysova, “Fact Checking—As the Competence of the Media Literacy of a Modern Journalist,” Bulletin of Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Herald of Journalism 50, no. 4 (2019): 45–52.
Markabaeva, et al., “The Role of Social Information in the Formation of the Country’s Image: A Comparative Analysis (On the Example of Kazakhstan, Russia and Japan),” 2023.
T. Ribeiro, Media Freedom Literacy Round Table (Vienna: OSCE, 2022); S. Kemp, “Digital 2023: Kazakhstan,” Datareportal, February 13, 2023, https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2023-kazakhstan?rq=Kazakhstan; “Kazakhstan Urged to Rescind Draconian New ‘Fake News’ Law,” Reporters Without Borders, 2023, https://rsf.org/en/kazakhstan-urged-rescind-draconian-new-fake-news-law; S. J. Dixon, “Misinformation on Social Media – Statistics & Facts,” Statista, 2024, https://www.statista.com/topics/9713/misinformation-on-social-media/#topicOverview.
UNESCO, “Journalism, Fake News & Disinformation: Handbook for Journalism Education and Training,” 2018, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000265552.
S. Braesel and T. Karg, Media and Information Literacy: A Practical Guidebook for Trainers (Deutsche Welle Academy, 2021).
Dixon, “Misinformation on Social Media—Statistics & Facts.”
G. Arginbekova, S. Amitov, R. Kyndybayeva, and K. Bakbergen, “Human Values in the Age of Digitalization,” Scientific Herald of Uzhhorod University, Series Physics 55(2024): 2275–84, https://doi.org/10.54919/physics/55.2024.227oh5.
“Welcome to Faktabaari/Factbar,” Faktabarri, 2022, https://faktabaari.fi/in-english/.
“What Is Media Literacy Ireland?” Media Literacy Ireland, 2024, https://www.medialiteracyireland.ie/.
E. C. Tandoc Jr. and H. K. Kim, “Avoiding Real News, Believing in Fake News? Investigating Pathways from Information Overload to Misbelief,” Journalism 24, no. 6 (2023): 1174–92, https://doi.org/10.1177%2F14648849221090744.
European Broadcasting Union: The World’s Leading Alliance of Public Service Media, 2024, https://www.ebu.ch/home.
The Austrian Broadcasting Corporation, 2024, https://orf.at/.
The European Journalism Training Association, 2024, https://ejta.eu/index.php/about-us/; EUFACTCHECK, 2024, https://eufactcheck.eu/about-us/.
“What’s Crap on WhatsApp?,” 2024, https://www.whatscrap.africa/.
Estonian National Broadcasting Corporation, 2024, https://www.err.ee/.
Croatian Radio and Television, 2024, https://www.hrt.hr/; UNESCO, “Practical Guide to Functional Literacy: A Training Method for Development,” 1973, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000137680.
Netherlands Public Broadcasting, 2024, https://npo.nl/; Italian Radio Television, 2024, https://www.rai.it/.
The Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development. “Guidelines for Digital Transformation for 2021–2027 (Informative Part),” 2020.
B. J. Jeangène Vilmer, A. Escorcia, M. Guillaume, and J. Herrera, “Information Manipulation: A Challenge for Our Democracies,” Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs and Ministry for the Armed Forces, 2018; UNESCO, “Abuja Declaration on Global Financing for Media and Information Literacy: An Imperative to Fight Against Disinformation and Build Trust,” 2023, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000385151.
Reality Check – BBC: The Fact-checking Arm of the British Broadcasting Company (BBC), 2024, https://credibilitycoalition.org/credcatalog/project/reality-check---bbc/.
Decoders, Le Monde, 2024, https://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs/.
Political Report Card, Pagella Politica, 2024, https://pagellapolitica.it/.
Correctiv, “CORRECTIV Spotlight,” 2024, https://correctiv.org/.
Full Fact Fights Bad Information, 2024, https://fullfact.org/.
I. Denys, “Language as an Important Means of Information Encoding,” Library Science, Record Studies, Informology 20, no. 1 (2024): 8–11, https://doi.org/10.63009/lsrsi/1.2024.08.
B. P. Etemi and H. Uzunboylu, “The Effects of Flipped Learning Method on Students’ Perception and Learning of Java Programming,” International Journal of Engineering Education 36, no. 4 (2020): 1372–82.
H. Xu, “An Improved Large Language Model for Fake News Recognition System,” Northern University of Malaysia,2024, https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.35257.54889; A. Ali, and M. Gulzar, “An Improved FakeBERT for Fake News Detection,” Applied Computer Systems 28, no. 2 (2023): 180–88, https://doi.org/10.2478/acss-2023-0018.
O. Ronzhes, “Digital Applications as Tools for Psychological Adaptation of Citizens to Changes,” Scientific Studios on Social and Political Psychology 29, no. 2 (2023): 14–25, https://doi.org/10.61727/sssppj/2.2023.14.
Y. Kravtsov and A. Yakunina, “Philosophical Purpose of Social Communication in the Aspects of Sustainable Development of Modern Social Reality,” Ljubljana School of Business 1 (2019): 160–72.
K. D. Hyun, M. Seo, and G. Lee, “Politicization of Fake News Debates and Citizen Attitudes Towards Fake News and Its Regulation,” Journalism (2024), https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849241231061.
I. Akoyeva, M. Atanayeva, T. Buldybayev, U. Ospanova, and K. Nurumov, “Trust in Media in Kazakhstan,” Papers of Canadian International Conference on Humanities & Social Sciences 2019 (Unique Conferences Canada, 2019), 26–34.
S. Altay, A. S. Hacquin, and H. Mercier, “Why Do So Few People Share Fake News? It Hurts Their Reputation,” New Media & Society 24, no. 6 (2022): 1303–24, https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820969893; G. Pennycook and D. G. Rand, “The Psychology of Fake News,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 25, no. 5 (2021): 388–402, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.02.007; E. C. Tandoc Jr., D. Lim, and R. Ling, “Diffusion of Disinformation: How Social Media Users Respond to Fake News and Why,” Journalism 21, no. 3 (2020): 381–98, https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884919868325.
A. Katyetova, “Teaching Computer Science in Kazakhstan Primary Schools: Current State, Problems and Perspectives,” in 17th International Technology, Education and Development Conference (Valencia, Spain: INTED2023 Proceedings, 2023), 2524–2531, https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2023.0710.
Z. A. Hakimov, A. Medatov, V. Kotetunov, Y. Kravtsov, and A. Abdullaev, “Algorithm for the Development of Information Repositories for Storing Confidential Information,” Proceedings on Engineering Sciences 2, no. 5 (January 2023): 227–38, https://doi.org/10.24874/PES05.02.005.
O. Pluzhnyk, Berezanska, I., and P. Drok, “The Role of Digital Technologies in Improving Library and Information Communication: Trends and Challenges,” Society. Document. Communication 8, no. 3 (2023): 55–65, https://doi.org/10.69587/sdc/3.2023.55.
Kemp, “Digital 2023”: “Kazakhstan Urged to Rescind Draconian new ‘Fake News’ Law,” 2023.
“Kazakhstan Urged to Rescind Draconian New “Fake News” Law,” 2023; A. Kumenov, “Kazakhstan: Wary Media See Peril in Government Attempt to Combat Fake News,” Eurasianet, March 3, 2023, https://eurasianet.org/kazakhstan-wary-media-see-peril-in-government-attempt-to-combat-fake-news.
T. Lebid, “Electronic Culture: Achievements and Growth Vectors,” Library Science, Record Studies, Informology 19, no. 4 (2023): 22–32, https://doi.org/10.32461/2409-9805.4.2023.293968.
EFMN, “Anti-fake: Kazakhstan has a School Textbook on Media Literacy,” Eurasian Fact-Checking and Media Literacy Network, December 9, 2019, https://efmn.factcheck.kz/en/2019/12/09/anti-fake-kazakhstan-has-a-school-textbook-on-media-literacy/.
N. F. Muratova, N. K. Toshpulatova, and G. B. Alimova, Fake News: Disinformation in the Media (Innovative Development Publishing House, 2020).
J. Roozenbeek and S. van der Linden, “Don’t Just Debunk, Prebunk: Inoculate Yourself Against Digital Misinformation,” Society for Personality and Social Psychology, February 10, 2021, https://spsp.org/news-center/character-context-blog/dont-just-debunk-prebunk-inoculate-yourself-against-digital.
D. Omirgazy, “News Digest: Foreign Media on Central Asian Security and Cooperation Forum, Kazakhstan’s SCO Chairmanship and More,” The Asanta Times, July 14, 2023, https://astanatimes.com/2023/07/news-digest-foreign-media-on-central-asian-security-and-cooperation-forum-kazakhstans-sco-chairmanship-and-more/.
Dadakhonov, “The Effectiveness of Foreign aid in the Sphere of Media and Information Literacy in Central Asian Countries.”
H. Koh and K. Baek, “The Differential Impact of Traditional and Social Media on Public Confidence: The Case of Kazakhstan,” Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization,2022.
B. Omar, O. D. Apuke, and Z. M. Nor, “The Intrinsic and Extrinsic Factors Predicting Fake News Sharing Among Social Media Users: The Moderating Role of Fake News Awareness,” Current Psychology 43 (2023): 1235–47, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04343-4.
B. Kurambayev and K. Myssayeva, “An Examination of the Use of Fake Names Among Central Asian Journalists,” Journal of Media Ethics 38, no. 1 (2023): 48–59, https://doi.org/10.1080/23736992.2022.2158830.
Akoyeva et al., “Trust in Media in Kazakhstan.”
S. T. Ahmed, “Mitigating Fake News and Misinformation Using News Literacy Behaviors (NLBs),” Arab Media and Society, August 14, 2023, https://doi.org/10.70090/STA23MFN.
D. G. Young, K. H. Jamieson, S. Poulsen, and A. Goldring, “Fact-Checking Effectiveness as a Function of Format and Tone: Evaluating FactCheck.org and FlackCheck.org,” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 95, no. 1 (2018): 49–75, https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699017710453.
M. Weideman, “Fake News: The Role of Search Engines and Website Content,” International Scientific Conference “Western Balkan Information Literacy,” 2018, 26–35.
S. Bengtsson and S. Johansson, “A Phenomenology of News: Understanding News in Digital Culture,” Journalism – Theory, Practice & Criticism 22, no. 11(2021): 2873–89, https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884919901194.
S. Çoksan and A. D. Yilmaz, “Focusing on Fake News’ Contents: The Association Between Ingroup Identification, Perceived Outgroup Threat, Analytical-Intuitive Thinking and Detecting Fake News,” Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 24, no. 1 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12371.
A. Marino, P. Pariso, and M. Picariello, “Digital Platforms and Entrepreneurship in Tourism Sector,” Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues 9, no. 4 (2022): 282–303, http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2022.9.4(15).