Conspiracy theories: article link
2014 Annenburg Public Policy Center survey: link
Online media services like Facebook and Google continue to struggle with eliminating misinformation and fake news on their platforms. Following the Las Vegas shooting, Facebook's "Crisis Response" page featured an article misidentifying the shooter, and many videos on Youtube claimed that there were multiple shooters. Although neither of these stories are true, their prevalence was largely due to Facebook's and Google's algorithms, which "just look for signs of popularity and recency at first, without first checking to ensure relevance." In response, both Facebook and Google have taken action to incorporate more "human review" in the assessment of their content, rather than relying on algorithms.
With the media becoming a dominant facet of political socialization in current culture, it is clear that online sources play a major role in influencing the political mindsets of the public, especially the younger generation. However, as polls have shown, public knowledge about politics is still very low; only 36% of respondents to a 2014 national survey were able to name the three branches of the U.S. government. Thus, there is a discrepancy between the high amount of information we have access to and the low amount of information we know.
What is the best way to combat fake news? Why is public knowledge still so lacking, even in an information-rich society? What actions should be taken to help the public be more informed?
9 comments:
As we learned in class, polls do vary in purpose and their reliance. There are many different parts of the United States that aren’t as well-educated as larger cities. Furthermore, many people don’t wish to be a part of politics, or choose to ignore areas that they don’t find useful. In a pew research report (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/07/1-in-10-americans-dont-give-a-hoot-about-politics/) many Americans were reported to be bystanders, for various reasons.I think this plays a role in the large amount of fake news that is able to come out unnoticed for a short amount of time. Since many Americans aren’t concerned with aspects of news, bits of information can get by as “fake news”.
Fake news is hard to combat in current day society because there are a multitude of news sources that often exaggerate the truth or falsify news in order to gain more readers. When there are so many stories that formulate around a single event it is hard to pass on truthful information. Especially when popular news stations hold bias, it is hard to find reliable sources. I think the government and schools should teach their students to identify bias and find reliable sources to trust. However, it shouldn’t be the student’s job to fake news. But with the reality of current society, it is important to search over several sources prior to coming to conclusions
I don't think it is the responsibility of the internet to monitor what is and isn't fake. If anything serious comes along, it would likely be handled by the hurt recipients, such as through a libel case. If someone spreads fake information throughout the internet to defame a person or public figure and they can prove it with intent (for public figures) as we learned in class, that wronged party may take it up with the courts. This often doesn't happen, of course, because there are so many fake news outlets and often none of them alone do much damage. The responsibilty, in my opinion, falls to the reader. People have to learn to decifer what is fake and what is real, like Shweta pointed out, people can learn in school, but more so people have to just try to use corroboration, sourcing, and common sense when reading the news. I think part of the reason fake news is an issue is not really because people are dumb, but because they see what they want to see - if a news story gives them a headline that makes them happy because it slanders a certain figure, talks of a certain event, or just is entertaining, a person is going to be more inclined to read and agree with what they read. Such affirmation bias may be a major cause of why fake news is such an issue. Ultimately, I think identifying fake news and interpreting the truth falls upon the reader, however unfortunate that may be.
Google and Facebook are meant to be public platforms where the users are free to share information, so I do not believe they should be held responsible for the fake news. It is the fault of the individual that is falsely spreading information. New York Times v. Sullivan made it easy for individuals to express their opinions as they decided that the plaintiff cannot rely solely on false information to make their case. However, it failed to predict these consequences. It would be very difficult to eliminate fake news without causing outrage over the right to free speech. I agree with Shweta in that it would be best if people were taught how to detect fake news and potential bias of the source and learn to filter out the information.
Similar to ideas presented above, I do not believe that platforms like Google and Facebook are responsible for weeding out fake news from their sites. Even if these sites were to employ greater human fact-checking/corroboration, it would be impossible to check and filter every article released and every comment, so fake news will inevitably slip through the cracks and seep through to the casual Internet viewer. It is the reader’s responsibility to be wise about believing information that is true and I feel as if much of this quick belief in fake news is merely a matter of a lack of education about sources. However, many people are beyond their school days - maybe they forgot what they learned about distinguishing truthful from fallacious articles, or maybe they never got the opportunity to learn about it in school. In order to alleviate this, I suggest that some group, whether it be social science-based groups, communities, or governments, provide sourcing workshops to teach people to be more wary of the articles posted on the Internet. Though this may cost extra for these groups, being more vigilant in terms of Internet articles can greatly help with political involvement and can save a whole lot of drama/trouble down the line.
It is not the responsibility of Google or Facebook to filter information, however the public does not seem to be interested in sorting through fake or sensationalized news stories ourselves. Therefore, it is a positive step towards more accurate widespread knowledge for Google and Facebook to improve their systems. The long term solution, however, would be to equip people with the skills to discern wether or not a news source is reliable. Being able to understand the reliability of news is crucial to having a more informed public. While many do not consider themselves political, there is a certain responsibility as a US citizen to have a basic understanding of current events and the current political situation.
Since it seems that most commenters agree that it is the responsibility of the viewers to discern whether news is "fake news" or whether it is reliable, what methods should be used to help the people make this determination? Some mentioned workshops and schooling, but are there any other tools that should be provided? Are such tools worth investing in?
I believe that right now people should just be aware that fake news is a real thing and that it is very common. If people are aware of that fact, then it would most likely be harder for them to instantly believe everything they read from news websites. The incentive for writers to create fake news and click bait titles is too high for them to stop doing it, even if the consequences could involve the reputation of their website. Websites are always rushing to get the news of an event out so they can beat their competitors. When a big event does happen, and news websites scramble to get all the info they can get, there might be some things in the articles that aren't completely true. Knowing that not everything written in a news article is necessarily true allows less people to fall for fake news.
Like the comments before have mentioned, the responsibility of filtering out fake news should ultimately lie with the reader and not with social media companies such as Google or Facebook. In fact, I don’t believe that online information can (or should) be regulated, even if the information is false, exaggerated, or biased. I agree with Gabriel that a major factor in the willingness of Americans to indulge in fake news is confirmation bias. Platforms such as Facebook make it easy to for users to only see political information that is tailored to their own political views. Although biased news isn’t necessarily harmful, confirmation bias prevents people from thoroughly evaluating whether or not an online source is truly trustworthy. Thus, further efforts to teach students to decipher reliable sources from unreliable sources would do much to create a more informed public.
Post a Comment