Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Social Media Case Reflection 1

          My first personal encounter with “fake news” will probably date me a little bit. Before internet was a mainstream think in homes we kids would send around chain main via the postal service. We would receive a fun letter from one of our friends threatening us with certain death or at the very least severe illness if we did not forward the letter onto to 7 of our closest friends. If we followed the instructions we would be blessed with our crush confessing their love to us or even better with super athletic powers, both pretty important things to a 10 year old boy. Of course as a 10 year old boy I was easily duped into believing that said promises would come true dependent on the action I chose to take and not wanting to die an early death I would promptly forward on the messages and wait for my athletic ability to increase tenfold. It is obviously to know either by my lack of Olympic medal or common sense that those promises never came true. It is easy to look back as an adult and laugh at a child’s propensity to believe something seemingly unbelievable but it is even more disheartening as an adult to read a news story and have to wonder if you are being duped once again. 
         Those chain letters, turned into chain emails, which turned to “fake news” being spread about social media websites. I have been on Facebook for all of a week (I know, crazy) and I have seen multiple stories of fake news all over the site. So what is it? How can you tell if something is a fake news or not? What can we do to stop it? Can it even be stopped? These are all questions that any responsible social media user should ask themselves although the term “responsible social media user” might be a contradiction.
          FactCheck.org provides a good basis for the definition of fake news and ways to spot it. Fake news is deliberately published hoax new stories, propaganda and disinformation that  uses social media to drive up web-traffic and/or perpetuate a certain agenda, political or otherwise. I would say that based on that definition alone the publishing of fake news is unethical. Over the years we have seen the influence that social media has almost everything it touches. It has the power to make careers overnight and it has the power to destroy them. It has the power to raise millions of dollars for wonderful causes and it has the power to cast doubt on the relevancy of those same causes. This effects is increased exponentially when something goes “viral.” This is the hope for these “fake news” creators, if a story goes viral and is shared and liked then their web traffic increases which ultimately mean more money in their pockets. I highly doubt that thoughts of whose career might be hurt or what damage might be done from their story really matters to them.
          The real issue though is not the content creators though it is the content consumers. Obviously it would be nice if those who are creating these stories just suddenly stopped and we could go back to believing everything we read on the internet. According to the Ethical Journalism Network “The economics of social media favor gossip, novelty, speed and “shareability”,” which makes it the perfect medium for fake news stories. These leave us as consumers with the responsibility of doing a little bit of research before sharing something online. Sometimes it is easy to spot a fake news story but most times it can be difficult especially when one tries to base their assumptions on a summary or headline alone. FactCheck.org suggests that you read beyond the headline since they are specifically thought up to shock or interest the reader. Another suggestion is to check the author and the originating website for credibility. Lastly they point out the importance of checking your biases. I found this suggestion to be particularly interesting considering the political climate we find ourselves in and all the news we are hearing about fake news in politics.
        FactCheck explains that we tend to put more stock in information that confirms our beliefs and are quicker to discount information that does not. They make the very understandable suggestion that the next time you are appalled by a story involving a politician you dislike to not automatically share it but to take some time to check it out. If the story proves to be true there is nothing wrong with sharing it on your social media as a way to express your beliefs or thoughts but you will find that the more appalling and outlandish the story the more likely it is to be fake new propagated for views.
        I think the real question becomes, are we as the content consumers the ones responsible for the fact checking or is it the social media websites’ responsibility to do that for us? In my opinion it is ultimately the responsibility of consumers. If a person is going to have a social media account then they should be concerned about what content they are perpetuating and should have a hand in deciding if said content is legitimate and verifiable.



No comments:

Post a Comment