For me one of the main
reasons for using Facebook or Twitter is that I usually stumble upon all sorts
of interesting things that I would otherwise most likely miss. Food for
thought, different viewpoints and entertainment to be found by just
pointing and clicking, how great is that? The downside of all this quick and
easy sharing is that sometimes we don’t take enough time to think twice before
doing it. Thinking twice is a double edged sword. On the one hand over-analysing
may prevent one from sharing potentially interesting stuff, which is the main reason I
keep a lot of things to myself. On the other hand being too hasty may result in
having egg on one’s face. Especially if one shares something as a news item
when it’s not.
Lately I have seen a
lot of 'news' in my FB feed that on closer inspection turn out to be something
else altogether. People whose judgement I would normally trust get
carried away and share articles that are obvious hoaxes, parodies or deliberate
misinformation. But it is surprisingly easy to fall for them. It has a lot to do with the way the web works.
The beauty of the web is that one can usually link directly to
the good stuff on any given site, bypassing entry pages and all the other
things that are not of interest to one at that time. However, using direct links
gotten from search engines or social media sites tends to make it more
difficult to put the content in proper context.
Something looking like
a bona fide news article might actually be a satire. The Onion has been known to
cause some embarrassment. Some lesser known news parody sites may be even
harder to spot, especially if the satire happens to support some personal bias
(it can be very tempting to believe that all the crazy stuff attributed to someone like Sarah Palin is true). Parody is even harder to identify if it is
published on a site that also does serious journalism, like The New Yorker for instance. I
have seen pieces by Andy Borowitz shared as actual news.
Parody aside, even on the
websites of well respected news outlets there
are lots of stuff that can look like news articles if one doesn't pay attention.
Opinions, blogs and the sort are often seen shared as news in social media. Even more confusing
can be the ‘citizen journalism’ sections of some news sites. Take CNN’s iReport
for instance. The FAQ says “Everything you see on iReport starts with someone
in the CNN audience. Stories submitted to CNN iReport are not edited
fact-checked or screened before they post.” This will probably not be
self-evident to someone who accesses an iReport item through a direct link.
Then there are the
sites that have a political, ideological or commercial agenda. This is in my opinion
the most harmful category as people may unwittingly be made accomplices in
disseminating advertising camouflaged as news at best and blatant propaganda at
worst.
So, how to avoid sharing
faux news? Say you have found a mouth-watering
piece of news but have doubts about it. How to asses its credibility? A couple of humble suggestions:
- Consider the source. Is the site familiar to you? Have you ever even heard of it before? What does their ‘about’ section say about them? What, if anything, does Wikipedia say about them?
- Consider the format. Does it read like news? Does it feel exaggerated? Are there claims that seem unbelievable? How about other items on the same site or category of articles?
- Check other sources. Is this the only source for the news? If there are others are they reliable?
Having said all this,
please don't let it keep you from sharing. After all, it’s the reason I keep coming back to FB
and Twitter. And if you get it wrong and share some nonsense, never mind, it happens to the best of us. Just keep in mind that everything that glitters is not news. Just
saying.
Tekstit
