The rise of fake news on social networks is a game changer. Traditional news media thought they were moving in one direction, but could actually be heading somewhere else altogether. We need to go back to the beginning, and start again.
Fake money, a fake identity, a fake painting or sculpture. These are forgeries and shams, or even scams, fraudulently intending to be passed off as genuine. Similarly, ‘fake news’ is a hoax, a swindle, a con. It is a fictional (or semi-fictional) news story, fabricated in order to deceive. It is not the same as mistakes, careless inaccuracies or bias, which may occur in fact-based news.
Fake news stories circulated on social media are designed to seek attention. Some aim to make money, generating revenue through the number of clicks. Others try to influence voters and elections, or the reputation of a politician. Some might just be created by trouble-makers or jokers. But fake news successfully fools people more often than you might care to believe.
Since the spread of the internet, the predicted demise of mainstream news outlets has been a concern. The sustainability of traditional media is under threat. Many people get their news (and advertising) through social networks.
But the pendulum may be swinging back. Trusted news outlets are also gatekeepers, filtering the swamp of fiction and outright lies on the web. If a story features on a reputable news site, then a reader can be reasonably certain (nothing is infallible) that it is not fake news.
Media education is essential, both for children and adults. Everyone needs to have a nose for an internet scam. The tell-tale signs of fake news can be recognised and picked up, but masses of people are taken in all the same.
The hoaxes are clever, and nobody is immune. It is so cheap and easy to manipulate images that not even your eyes can be trusted. It’s all over, we need to start again.
Recognising the value of a news story is the bread-and-butter of professional and independent journalists and editors. A serious and reliable news outlet, which values its reputation, will not deliberately publish or upload fake news.
People no longer know what to believe on the internet, and having a dependable and trustworthy source of news is vital
During the US election, fake news stories were fabricated and circulated on social networks. Many were exposed as false, but may still have influenced voters. Fake news chips away at the truth, and finally nobody knows what to believe any more, or where to turn.
A healthy democracy functions on the assumption that, to make the best choices, people must have access to accurate information. The spread of the internet has long been understood as empowering and ‘democratising’. Yet there is growing concern that the role of social networks may, in terms of the rapid dissemination of fake news, sometimes undermine democracy.
Many of these networks use complex algorithms and methods to recognise and promote popular stories, or to bump up advertising. The mathematics of it is well beyond me. Popular stories feature more frequently in news feeds, push out other stories and then ‘follow’ people who have shown an interest. When you go back online, similar items to your previous choices will mysteriously appear.
Whether a popular story is fake or true, the hidden hands in social networks might still help to disseminate it. These platforms can thereby assist (albeit unintentionally) in the rapid and efficient spread of falsehoods and blatant lies – so rapid that it is very difficult to counter them with the truth, which lags behind.
By the time a story is exposed and blocked, the damage is done. Fake news is not an entirely new phenomenon, but the speed at which it can be shared is unprecedented.
In the aftermath of the US election, Facebook’s founder Mark Zuckerberg responded to the growing concern about what he called ‘misinformation’ on the network. He tried to reassure users that Facebook takes misinformation seriously and is working on handling it better.
Facebook generally relies on users to help identify fake posts. It intends to strengthen this, making it easier for people to report. Zuckerberg explained that they also work with fact-checking agencies. They are considering displaying warnings. They could also change their advertising policies, or rethink the ‘related articles’ section in people’s news feeds.
Facebook’s dilemma is that it wants to avoid being an “arbiter of truth”. It does not want to discourage the sharing of opinions or mistakenly restrict accurate content.
But an unregulated approach also has its detractors. Writers like Andrew Smith in The Guardian have posited that, if large numbers of adults get their news from social networks, then the networks must be accountable. He asks whether they should be treated as media organisations and held accountable for the information from which they profit. Actions have consequences, even if unintended.
The funeral requiem of traditional media started being composed years ago. But things are turning out differently. Far from expiring, the life of professional, independent media is instead being reshaped.
People no longer know what to believe on the internet, and having a dependable and trustworthy source of news is vital. This is why the rise of fake news is a potential game changer.
petracdingli@gmail.com