Fake news has become increasingly relevant and dangerous as people seem to become more illiterate in the realm of information. Fake news, also known as false news or pseudo news, is a form of news consisting of deliberate disinformation. These reports and headlines typically or spread via new media platforms, but also can spread through traditional news media. The only potential solution at this point is increased societal information literacy. Fake news is a massive problem tied to confirmation bias and a me first attitude in first world society that needs to be addressed sooner rather than later.
Digital networks have amplified the spread of fake news and greatly increased the need to address the issue. Social media algorithms cause fake news to spread like wildfire, as they take into account the amount of time spent with content and how it is shared between users. Fake news content is driven more by confirmation bias than any other factor (Peck, 2020). The confirmation bias of social media users allows individuals who are creating this false content to drive their agenda forward by capitalizing on their willingness to accept and believe misinformation. Even coverage of events that have actually occurred can become distorted as they circulate across the web. As social media users project their own interpretations of issues fake news is created.
Understanding how and why fake news spreads
Fake news has become increasingly relevant and dangerous. Part of the reason that fake news is so difficult to counter or understand is because it is not based on fact. Fake news breeds on interpretation, and is enabled by widespread belief through like minded individuals. An experiment dissected within MIS Quarterly enlisted 83 individuals to attempt to identify fake news on various social media platforms. The study eventually found users spend more time considering a fake headline than a real one, and that confirmation bias is a major contributing factor to fake news (Moravec, Minas, Dennis, 2019). One alarming result was that if headlines were flagged as false, users would not change their beliefs. Social media users tend to ignore headlines that they disagreed with, and instead focus on headlines that fed into their confirmation bias.
Many governments view fake news and the resulting misinformation as a threat to democracy within their borders. As a result, some countries have now passed laws that ban “fake news.” Tech companies have also started to adopt their own policies internally to work against harmful information being spread (Aswad, 2020). Things like putting out guides on how to avoid fake news clearly are not working, and it draws a need for a long term and carefully constructed solution. Even with these tech giants taking corporate responsibility and working against false information on their platforms it is spreading and being believed when consumed.
Why do people believe fake news if they aren’t biased?
At this point the only solution that does not contain several negative ramifications is for the public to become more information savvy. According to Quartz, Only 9% of 15-year-olds can tell the difference between fact and opinion (Anderson, 2019). That figure comes directly from the Programme for International Student Assessment, an international test of math, science, and reading which is administered by the OECD. If only one in ten people can tell what is truly based on fact, and what is based on opinion, how in the world can the world continue to function? People will blindly follow whoever has the most convincing fake news surrounding their ideals. This presents a colossal and terrifying problem. The expansive amount of information and news that is available from a myriad of sources across the web requires strong literacy skills (Morrissey, 2020). Something that it seems people do not possess. Information professionals desperately need to increase their efforts to combat misinformation.
A research group from the International Journal for Educational Integrity surveyed faculty members at California State University. The researchers wanted to determine the faculty understanding of and familiarity with the concept of fake news (Weiss, Alwan, Garcia, 2020). Researchers developed an empirical study in the form of a survey. The survey contained both quantitative and qualitative questions. It was completed using the online survey tool Survey Monkey. Educators, especially in higher education, may be able to educate others to leverage critical thinking against fake news. Unfortunately the faculty were not unified on their definition of or understanding of false news. Their lack of unity indicates that confirmation bias of individuals in positions of authority may be exacerbating the problem.
A belief that you know more than an expert
So why are people so entitled? Why do people believe they know it all? Judy Woodruff, a reporter for PBS, discussed a book and study from Tom Nichols. Nichols found Americans need no details when asked whether or not to bomb an imaginary country. They answer consistently with their party affiliation. It’s telltale of a larger problem in the United States and our politics. This again ties fake news back to confirmation bias. Fake news has become increasingly relevant and dangerous as people seem to become more illiterate in the realm of information. The only potential solution at this point is increased societal information literacy. Fake news is a massive problem tied to confirmation bias and a me first attitude in first world society that needs to be addressed sooner rather than later.
In the modern era, we are able to educate ourselves more effectively and more quickly than ever before. Citizens can use social media to become well informed about local, national and world issues at any time of day. In spite of seemingly limitless new methods for digital education, human beings are less information savvy than ever before. What role does a content producer and individual who disperses information play in this new era?
Information gatekeepers have lost their power
I believe anyone who finds themselves in a role where they gate keep and distribute information has a tremendous ethical responsibility and a power that comes along with it. Part of what we have experienced over the past 30 years is caused by the removal of middle men in information. Publishers, television networks, radio groups and the likes have been taken out of the equation of information distribution.
The greatest catch 22 ever has been caused by network access via desktop computer and cellular devices. Creativity and knowledge burst out and expanded in all directions as Facebook and YouTube came onto the scene. Information became free and easy to access and find. It has become far simpler to find an independent project regarding what you would like to enjoy. Whatever topic you can imagine.
An era of infinite information and media
With all of the great things that come with this newfound freedom of creativity and availability of information, some negative has come as well. The middlemen in a few of these situations were very important information professionals. When you cut out your news directors, your doctors, your lawyers, you create the danger of under qualified individuals seizing authority and power. This is the phenomena this research has covered, and the phenomena I hope to push back against.
Every day, especially in the face of the pandemic, communication continues to change and evolve. Humanity continues to push the limits of what you can accomplish online. We do know that the upper limit of what’s possible has not yet been reached by human kind. But the growing pains we are experiencing now are real. They are genuine problems and require attentive thought and careful action towards solutions.
References
Anderson, J. (2019, December 03). Only 9% of 15-year-olds can tell the difference between fact and opinion. Retrieved September 12, 2020, from https://qz.com/1759474/only-9-percent-of-15-year-olds-can-distinguish-between-fact-and-opinion/
Aswad, E. M. (2020). In a World of “Fake News,” What’s a Social Media Platform to Do? Utah Law Review, 4, 1009–1028.
Deal, C., Bogdan, R., Miller, J. P., Rodebaugh, T., Caburnay, C., Yingling, M., … Lenze, E. J. (2018). Effects of Cable News Watching on Older Adults’ Physiological and Self-Reported Stress and Cognitive Function. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 87(2), 111–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091415017729684
Moravec, P. L., Minas, R. K., & Dennis, A. R. (2019). Fake News on Social Media: People Believe What They Want to Believe When It Makes No Sense at All. MIS Quarterly, 43(4), 1343–1360. https://doi-org.arbor.idm.oclc.org/10.25300/MISQ/2019/15505
Morrissey, A. (2020). Fake news and alternative facts: Information literacy in a post-truth era. SLIS Student Research Journal, 10(1), 1. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/ischoolsrj/vol10/iss1/9.
Peck, A. (2020). A Problem of Amplification: Folklore and Fake News in the Age of Social Media. Journal of American Folklore, 133(529), 329. https://doi-org.arbor.idm.oclc.org/10.5406/jamerfolk.133.529.0329
Sheares, G., Miklencicova, R., & Grupac, M. (2020). The Viral Power of Fake News: Subjective Social Insecurity, COVID-19 Damaging Misinformation, and Baseless Conspiracy Theories. Linguistic & Philosophical Investigations, 19, 121–127. https://doi-org.arbor.idm.oclc.org/10.22381/LPI1920209
Weiss, A. P., Alwan, A., Garcia, E. P., & Garcia, J. (2020). Surveying fake news: Assessing university faculty’s fragmented definition of fake news and its impact on teaching critical thinking. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 16(1), 1–30. https://doi-org.arbor.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s40979-019-0049-x
Woodruff, J. (2017, April 14). The problem with thinking you know more than the experts. Retrieved September 3, 2020, from https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/problem-thinking-know-experts
Yerlİkaya Turgay. (2020). Social Media and Fake News in the Post-Truth Era : The Manipulation of Politics in the Election Process. Insight Turkey, 22(2), 177.
Yoo, Heejeong. (2018). The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Established Knowledge and Why It Matters. Journal of the Korean Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 29. 185-186. 10.5765/jkacap.180021.
