Category: Fake News

Fake news is a big threat to journalism and the trust between consumers of news and journalists. However, it isn’t a new problem. ‘Rumor and false stories have probably been around as long as humans have lived in groups where power matters’ (Burkhardt, 2017). It hasn’t been until recently that the term fake news has been used commonly even though it has existed for many years. ‘In the late twentieth century, the internet provided new means for disseminating fake news on a vastly increased scale’ (Burkhardt, 2017).

As more fake news articles and websites are being created it is damaging the trust between the consumer and the media. It is becoming increasingly harder to differentiate what is a legitimate news article and what is a fake news article. With the growth of social media and more people spending their time looking at ‘news feeds’ and ‘timelines’, the most important thing for an article is the title. This is due to the fact that ‘59 percent of all links shared on social networks aren’t actually clicked at all’ (DeMers, 2016). There are people that take advantage of this and purposely create fake news or clickbait in order to get more clicks or views.

A town in Macedonia labeled as ‘The fake news factory of the world’ by Wired was the ‘registered home of at least 100 pro-Trump websites, many of them filled with sensationalist, utterly fake news’ (Subramanian, 2017). It goes on to say the websites had a lot of traffic which made the owners of the website a lot of money. This shows that a lot of people will click an article purely based on the title with no care for the legitimacy of the content. Websites like these are part of the reason consumers of news are starting to have less and less trust in journalists because they can’t always believe what they see.

Fake news has a massive impact on the credibility of journalism because nowadays many people access their news via social media or the internet and therefore nothing has to be checked before it is published unlike when the main way was via newspapers.

The reasons people create fake news are varied, whether it’s for monetary gain like the pro-trump websites or as a parody in light-hearted publications like The Onion and The Daily Mash (Carson, 2018). This makes countering fake news a difficult task, although commercially driven fake news is being countered by removing adverts from the websites (Carson, 2018).

As mentioned in the introduction, fake news isn’t a new issue and according to an exhibition in Missouri, there are three types of fake news. These are “errors, hoaxes, and truths deemed false” (Sayej, 2018). These three types have existed for a very long time as people have always told lies for their personal gain.

In the Pre-Printing press era, it was mainly used by leaders to control information given to the people and they were often created to portray their great powers or success in battle. However, without any way to verify the claims it was potentially fake news. (Burkhardt, 2017).

After the invention of the printing press in 1440 there was a vast increase of information being spread. This information came in different formats such as books, newspapers, broadsides, and cartoons. These were ‘often created by writers who had monetary incentives’ (Burkhardt, 2017). Alternatively, some writers were paid to write information that benefitted the employer (Burkhardt, 2017). The result of monetary incentives subsequently threatens journalism because rather than focusing on honesty, journalists would write whatever makes them the most money.

Although it is hard to distinguish fake news in the modern era, in the days before social media it was just as hard. If a fake news article is published now, it can be deleted if discovered to be false, but in the old days when publishing was done in a physical format, it was more difficult. In 1844 on the 13th of April the New York Sun published an article entailing an extraordinary achievement. They posted excerpts from a diary that revealed that the Atlantic Ocean had been crossed in a hot air balloon in the short time of 75 hours. This diary was of course a hoax. It had been entirely fabricated by a man named Edgar Allen Poe who was a fan of hoaxes. However, with no confirmation of the feat being achieved, the Sun was forced to publish a retraction just two days later and the fake news was there for exposed (Edemariam, 2009)

On January 16th, 1926 a radio bulletin was broadcast on the BBC, the broadcast itself was supposed to be a harmless spoof thought up by a catholic priest named Father Ronald Knox. As radio was a reasonably new technology and was a trusted source of news, the public failed to recognize it as a spoof which led to mass panic. ‘The broadcaster was inundated with calls from terrified listeners over the transmission’ (Wilkes, 2011) The bulletin was reporting chaos and an attack on the city of London. It left listeners believing famous landmarks had been destroyed and a ‘government minister had been lynched’ (Wilkes, 2011). It was broadcasted on a weekend when there was a lack of newspapers due to snow which ‘caused a minor panic as people assumed the revolutionaries had stopped them’ (Fowler, 2013).

In the 2016 US presidential election, the phrase ‘fake news’ was used by Donald Trump to counter various news articles that if proven true would’ve damaged his campaign. Something that caused a huge stir after he was elected as the involvement of Russia interfering with the vote. Trump branded these allegations as “made-up story,” “ridiculous,” and “a hoax.” (Mayer, 2018). The situation with Donald Trump and his ongoing battle against the media could be crucial for journalism because he has many voters and fans that will believe in him and be influenced by him. Essentially, they will believe what he tells them to believe meaning their view of the media and journalists matches his, so they are less likely to believe any news they see. Trump has recently called the media ‘crazed lunatics’ and an ‘enemy of the people’ (Wagner, 2019). This statement is obviously bad for journalism because he is making out as if they are on opposing sides rather than just presenting news to the people.

Trump isn’t the first leader to accuse the press and news media of lying though. A very famous example of this in the past was in 1933 when Adolf Hitler took power in Germany. Instead of fake news though, Hitler used the word ‘Lügenpresse’ which translates to ‘Lying press’ in German. Hitler used this term to describe news companies that didn‘t support his fascist views (Zatat, 2017). Mainly aimed at Jewish, communist, and foreign newspapers, accusing them of creating ‘fake news’ (Griffing, 2017). At the start of his leadership, Hitler focused on taking control of the mainstream media in Germany to have the biggest influence he could. He set up radio, press, and newsreels to strike the fear of a ‘Communist uprising’ which was fake news. During Hitler’s takeover of the German press, many journalists fled the country due to fear of imprisonment so their positions had to be filled by inexperienced journalists who were supportive of the Nazi Party.

Fake news before the invention of the internet had serious consequences such as the ones mentioned above. With fake news becoming more popular and is now a recognized word in the dictionary after winning ‘word of the year’ for 2017 (Hunt, 2017) people have become more aware and don’t always believe what they see online which makes it harder for journalists because they might have written an exciting news story but if it seems unlikely people are less likely to believe it than before the internet existed.

Today, social media is one of the best ways of spreading information and connecting with people around the world. Social media offers a form of interaction while giving you that information that other types of media do not. It also allows many corporations to better connect with their customers. In fact, according to a survey from the Pew Research Center in Washington DC, “67 percent of survey participants say they get their news from social media in general, and 45 percent say they get it from Facebook alone”. Yet, in our technologically connected world false information frequently travels faster than the truth and facts. This is seen especially in politics when the media completely lies or changes the actuality to satisfy and make one party look better or make another party look bad in the public’s eye to get them to like them.

Facebook is undoubtedly the largest social media source of news for Americans, which means there is a great amount of fake news on the site. There are many issues with this social media platform and as seen in the article from the New York Times” Defiant Zuckerberg Says Facebook Won’t Police Political Speech”. The article talked about how Facebook was accused of having fake political news on its site. Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive of Facebook spoke about this in an address at Georgetown University. Zuckerberg called for more free speech, and I completely disagree with him. He is at fault for allowing lies and falsehoods to appear in Facebooks advertisements. Free speech is what our country is built upon and one should be allowed to say what they want too. But the reader or viewer should not have to decide if the information is true or false. I don’t believe in publishing false information and lies, because fake news will give people the wrong idea about important political information and steer them in the wrong direction.

Mark Zuckerberg is taking a whole different approach to the fake news allegations surrounding Facebook. After Senator Elizabeth Warren accused Facebook of being a “disinformation-for-profit machine” Zuckerberg felt he had to say something. He took a trip to Georgetown University and made a 35-minute speech. Zuckerberg defended Facebook in such a way by saying Facebook was created to give people a voice and bring them together. Zuckerberg defended his case using the First Amendment and free speech while mentioning people like Martin Luther King Jr and Fredrick Douglass. He was defending something that our society wants to change, because of the hate talking, vicious content, and false information released to the public.

The New York Times article also mentioned Elizabeth Warren’s shots taken at the company. In a tweet, Warren stated “Facebook is actively helping Trump spread lies and misinformation. Facebook already help elect Donald Trump once. They might do it again and profit off of it.” Warren clearly believes that Facebook is so powerful that false information that has spread can hurt others and affect the most important part of politics such as the presidential election. Yet, Zuckerberg and Facebook will not try to regulate political speech advertisements. Instead, Facebook has launched a new plan that will not moderate politicians or fact-check political ads because even if there were false comments by political leaders, they were eye-grabbing and entertaining. They believe it is in the people’s best interest to listen and debate. What’s the point of publishing false information? To mess with people’s thoughts? That does not seem like what we should be doing in politics and as an American citizens.

Having many people view the news through social media hurts the perception and truth about things. Social media is the problem. Almost all social media outlets similar to Facebook like Twitter and Instagram will allow you to post almost anything, while traditional media establishments like CNN, MSNBC, and CNBC will not allow political advertisements with false content. The most recent case of a false political ad was published on Facebook. The Trump campaign released a 30-second video lying saying Joe Biden, a presidential candidate, committed corrupt acts in Ukraine. Most broadcast networks refused to post this, while other social media channels spread it like wildfire. Facebook did not take down the ad even after Biden’s Campaign said it was false. Senator Warren attempting to prove a point released a fake advertisement of her own saying Facebook supports Trump and his re-election. I don’t believe that was the right choice, even though she is trying to prove a good point. Releasing the ad will cause more tension and argument about the topic. Zuckerberg has basically taken the stance of removing ads will “hurt” our Democracy, which is false. He claims that it would be too hard to decide which ads were political or not, so there’s no point going down that road. Not to mention, Zuckerberg could be all for political ads considering the large profit Facebook makes from them.

After taking a deeper look into social media and political news, I have learned the spreading of fake news is an important problem we’re facing in society. Falsehoods spread insanely fast on social media. So, the best thing to do would be to restructure social media systems to decrease the effect caused by people who spread false information on purpose. For example, on Facebook, users do not choose the source of the articles they see. Picking sources such as television, newspapers, and online news websites allow for “true news” because they look at who the source is before publishing, unlike most social media. This is not true for Facebook. Facebook allows advertisers with bad ideas in mind to pay to place their news in the user’s newsfeed. This can happen because Facebook is set up to show many different articles from different places. This can be from previously utilized sources or friends. Fake news takes advantage of the idea that individuals are more likely to accept and share articles that are similar to what they believe is true. Facebook should make it harder for people who spread fake news to let users see their ads. They don’t care if ads are truthful, Facebook is just giving people the most eye-catching headlines.

Considering Facebook’s plans for the future are not in support of getting rid of false political ads, there needs to be something else done. Right now, mainstream printed media like newspapers and journals have built relationships with their readers based on reputation. They carefully check information before publishing it, which gives them this reputation. There are no editors on social media which allows information to spread wildly. Although social media companies like Facebook have control of the spreading of fake news and choose not to do anything, there is something that we as viewers and readers can do.

It is not the simplest or easiest thing to do, but there are some steps to follow to see if your news is reliable or not. When you see news that seems suspicious, check if other news agencies have the same topics. To determine whether or not it’s false you can check the data and links they refer to as their sources. Other signs that they are suspicious are news pieces without a name of an author and articles that come from non-reliable news sources. If I were to look at the false advertisement that was released about Joe Biden, I would look for the sources and where they got their information from. I think that people should not just read the headline and not look into the article. That is one of the biggest things. Reading just a little bit of it, won’t let you know if it is false or not.

It is disgusting to see where our country is with the “fake news” idea. Especially relating to the Facebook article. Yes, we have the first amendment and free speech, but we don’t have the right to spread lies that will damage someone’s career. It is sickening to see that our world, especially in politics has gone from making someone look bad just to make themselves look better, instead of showing your own best qualities. A true American would not be manipulating the world to believe certain things. That is not what our country’s basic principles were founded on. If anything, fake news will cause us to go further away from Democracy and our founding beliefs. Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook are not helping the situation at all. They are making it seem as if they cannot stop fake news because it goes against free speech. But is there really any point to it if everything people see, hear, and talk about is fake? That would mean people all around the world are debating about things that do not matter and are not relevant. So, the things that actually matter and are true would not be the main story. Making advertisements that falsely depict politics is horrible. In most cases, fake news will draw more attention than actual news stories that matter. People could make wrong decisions and could hurt them. All it will create is confusion and unrest in society. The spread of fake news ultimately impacts the way that we interpret and respond to real news.

Falsehood and information that mimics truth have been floating around in different forms since the dawn of the dissemination of ideas. Rumors control the way society functions, dictating cultures and counterculture formation at the time of the idea’s infancy. When analyzing what exactly “fake news” means and how the term might evolve with changes in time and attitude, it is clear that it is synonymous with the term rumor. Rumors always have at least some aspect of truth or knowledge behind them, and examples of true ‘fake news’ are always seeded with reality and embellished or falsified in other manners. By comparing the fake news climate to a rumor, it gives a strict enough definition with room for vague applications to real-life examples. The implication that all “true” fake news stems from the basic definition of a rumor, allows for the truth behind the matter to become more clear. Realizing the difference between misinformation and blatant lies opens the door for conversation and media literacy to improve. While erroneous information runs rampant across media, especially today’s new internet and communication platforms that seemingly emerge instantaneously, deciphering the meaning behind fake news, deception, and trustworthy content is becoming harder and harder.

Today’s access to constant news circulation has made the rapid spread of content become so mobilized that the differentiation of fact and fiction has to happen almost synchronously with when a material is published. Tenfold of sources to get information to create an overwhelmed public in which consumers will search for any element of “truthiness” in everything they read. The looming threat that the news they are allocating their time to is fake or deceiving them is a constant threat for most Americans. Searching for “real”, and this term is used with extreme elasticity, information seems similar to the adage of searching for a needle in a haystack. Consistent wariness plagues the public when it comes to wondering if their news has been tainted. Most news sources, even the top four news networks have dealt with a decline in audience and credibility, spiking during the 2016 Presidential Election. However, this distrust in the media and perhaps the government itself does not only haunt the American people. Brazil’s recent president-elect gained vast popularity through the mass campaign through the messaging tool WhatsApp.

The BBC article “How WhatsApp is being abused in Brazil’s elections” explains in-depth the methods of communication and promotion the candidates used. “Many people join interest-based WhatsApp groups to talk about politics and hobbies with people they have not met,” the campaigns scraped data from these internet groups to target constituents and reform their system to make the eventual winner, right-wing Jair Bolsanaro, popular amongst the public. Looking at this example of how the dissemination of news, in Brazil’s case mainly fake news, it is clear to see the problem at hand. The differentiation between the truth and something that may contain some truth is getting out of hand. This can also be seen in effect with political satire and satirical newscasts. Shows like Last Week Tonight With John Oliver and The Colbert Report flourish the pressing matters of global issues with a cynical twist. Parodic news sources have weaseled their way into nearly every political news climate for decades. These entertainment shows broadcast a variety of content, but perhaps the easiest to mock are civic distress and prevalent politicians of today’s era.

Usually composed of “biting one-liners,” as Amber Day describes in “Truthiness and Consequences in Parodic News”, these parodies open new conversations between the lines. Because of the lack of media literacy and education, shows like these can provide one of two results: the proliferation of misinformation or the opportunity to search deeper for the truth. So many find devastation in the current political climate, that the option to receive news in a lighthearted manner jumps out to those who might have turned away from staying educated in the first place The “truthiness” offered to the public poses a danger and a solution all in one not so neatly wrapped package. Stephan Colbert defines this “truthiness” as the trend of feeling what’s right rather than doing the responsible action of research. The danger is that naive viewers may not grasp in its entirety the sarcasm and context of the entertainment portion that these political satires are presenting. The solution is that these media forces promote conversations among viewers and debates on the real in the fake news being reported. Spreading information disguised as humor has the potential to give wide-eyed spectators the chance to lose trust in their government.

Satire gives people the power to engage in opinions, and rumors give people the excuse to lose assurance in their authority figures. Mixing the two creates a realm of chaos and alters the true meaning of knowledge. The issue with this trend is that there doesn’t seem to be a line drawn in the sand to define an end or boundary. Fake news has been ramping up throughout the centuries, and its impact is only getting stronger. From analyzing the effects of the “penny press” and the industrial output of blatant lies, at least in American culture, “fake news” and other personas these fabrications have taken on are dictating the culture and the way society gathers information. Penny presses manufactured pure lunacy and was one of the major reasons why literacy among Americans skyrocketed. The phenomena behind the rapid gathering of information are synonymous with today’s feeding frenzy on Twitter trends and “witch hunts”. It is impossible to tell where the future of fake news will take us, but many have already predicted its course. Charlie Booker, creator of the science fiction thriller television series Black Mirror, draws up this dramatic plot in the episode “The Waldo Moment” where what first seemed to be an innocent satirical play on politics, turns a salacious cartoon bear into a successful British Parliament member. At first glance, this could never be the case, surely the public could never allow such a lewd and fictional being to have any authority over them. Booker’s commentary displays that societies, especially those that are run by media cycles, are losing the ability to differentiate between reality and fiction. However, it seems like Booker’s cartoon prophecy was not far from today’s world. Volodymyr Zelensky, the current president of Ukraine, came to his position, not through a long history of politics, but through television fame. Eerily similar to Waldo, Zelensky rose as a public figure and championed the Ukrainian elections. Ever evolving, media and the cycles it goes through have continuously molded how the public perceives information, the degradation of the trust among news sources, and the current state of media literacy.

Noah Levin takes a satirical approach to this phenomenon of poor media literacy in “Area Man Realizes Errors of Ways After Reading Onion Article,”. His approach of analyzing the man who made the mistake of trusting The Onion just serves as an example of the naive public who fall for the antics of satire every day. Looking at media consumption and how it has progressed, “fake news” has always had a foothold in the propagation of information. Rumors spark conversations that open doors for difficult communication. To definitively determine whether all fake news is rooted in malicious intent or is designed to divert from the seriousness of societal issues can only be determined by taste and personal opinion. Comparing gossip tabloids at the checkouts to speculations that can undermine entire campaigns, seems to be an extremely inappropriate exaggeration of the definition. What fake news truly means is objective and cannot be pinpointed to a singular moment in time where the interpretation was solidified. However, despite the uncertainty of a definitive definition, the behaviors and trends displayed by the many facets of fake news prove to hold great danger. The misinformation and rapid news cycles provide a ground for festering frustrations among the public. To prevent this forfeit of trust, media literacy must be established among all media consumers. Through the new media platforms and easy access to ebbing sources of entertainment and news, fake news has become the most prevalent it has ever been in society to date.

The shocking headlines of the past few years entitled “Donald Trump ends school shootings by banning schools.” and “Pope Francis shocks the world, endorses Donald Trump for president.” both have one thing in common, they weren’t true. These news headlines along with many others went viral and were viewed by thousands around the world. The twenty-first century has seen technological advances like no other time before, and the rise of digital news has led to people coming across fake news on a regular basis. Fake news is very harmful, it creates misconceptions and confusion of reality. It surfaces on most channels, whether it be televised or seen on any social media platforms such as Facebook or YouTube. Many people are often oblivious to whether the news is true or false because audiences do not utilize critical thinking when viewing news but believe whatever is shown to them. Even though these stories can be entertaining and amusing, they are dangerous and can affect a reader in ways they might not even imagine. I believe that fake news has a negative impact on our society and the individual mind. Political views can be changed because of fake news and cause someone to vote differently.

False rumors that target society or a certain individual can cause bullying and violence to innocent people. Also, fake news can affect an individual’s financial decisions due to false or exaggerated information provided. By looking at sudden changes in political views, unexplained violence towards others, and impulsive financial decisions, it is evident that fake news negatively impacts our society and individual minds. Fake news is all around the web and even though we all want it to obliterate, it will always be out there, and we must be cautious when reading unreliable information or we could face the consequences that come with believing false information. Many people have heard stories or maybe never heard of this at all, but false information played a huge role in the last American presidential election. This is one of the reasons why in recent years the media has begun to speak so much about the fake news phenomenon because this is an important democratic issue. In short, the impacts are very real, and we must avoid sharing fake news. In 2016, a gunman motivated by an online conspiracy theory intended to discredit the Democratic Party leaders. The gunman stormed into a pizzeria with the mission to stop a fictional pedophile ring. Meanwhile, millions of Facebook users were exposed to false stories presented as journalism leading up to the 2016 presidential election.

One of the main reasons as to why Trump won the 2016 presidential election is the internet media. Internet media is a platform anyone has access to, so through the usage of Internet media many people can get influenced by unofficial underground news sources. It is shocking that Hilary Clinton can expose confidential documents, and that Donald Trump, someone with instances of bankruptcy and multiple disrespectful encounters with women, can become the president of the United States. This is all possible because the media ignores facts like this and instead proposes news in favor to make a certain candidate likable. American journalism has gone through a revelation with the integration of internet media into the everyday lives of society. During the presidential election between Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton, there was a lot of news circulating on social media. A reader could’ve pulled up any Facebook page and see that there was a viral story circling the web about how Donald Trump was handling his campaign. There was a story that Donald Trump slapped a man in the audience who was disagreeing with him over an argument. This story was shared about eight hundred thousand times, with no credible source. People truly don’t know whether the news they are reading is real news or not. Fake news can be unreliable information that can go as far as people making money off it or promoting an idea using exaggerated or false information. Of the known false news stories that appeared prior to the election, those favoring Trump were shared around a total of 30 million times on Facebook, compared to those favoring Clinton that were only shared 8 million times.

The average American citizen saw perhaps several fake news stories in the months before the election, with just over half of those who recalled seeing them believing them; and people are much more likely to believe stories that favor their preferred candidate. For fake news to have changed the outcome of the election, a single fake article would need to have had the same persuasive effect as 36 television campaign ads. Although this stat may sound very unrealistic, you would be surprised how easily this goal could be met. With all the technological advances we have seen over the years, with just one simple share a fake story could go viral in minutes and change the opinion of thousands. Fake news, news articles that are meant to manipulate people’s perception of reality, has been commonly used to influence politics and promote advertising. But it has also become a method to stir up and intensify social conflict. Untrue stories have intentionally misled readers to protest over imaginary events and even result in violence. In an infamous case, a fake news story caused a man to shoot up an innocent pizzeria that was linked to alleged statements of human trafficking. In the incident known as “Pizzagate,” a man walked into a regular American pizza store with a semi-automatic rifle and fired shots. This gunman was convinced that this pizzeria had a hidden pedophilia trafficking ring led by presidential candidate, Hilary Clinton.

This fictional conspiracy was first created by a fake news website and was slowly spread all over the internet media. It was shared all over the world and many bots played a role in making this story go viral. People with malicious intent can use fake news to make American national conflicts more intense. The story of pizza gate has reached this much attention because it is a perfect example of how badly fake news can really impact our society. From a single post to over 40,000 collective members from Facebook groups keeping the conspiracy alive. The members post misinformation and wild allegations linking just about anyone to a worldwide pedophilia ring. Another popular similar case took place in India, false rumors about child kidnappers went viral on WhatsApp, prompting fearful mobs to kill two dozen innocent people. False information flooded social media attempting to link alleged kidnappings with multiple large families. And the millions of misguided Indians coming online for the first time mean many were going to be quick to believe whatever they see. The alleged accused family was on their way to a temple when they stopped to ask for directions. A grandmother nearby grew suspicious and alarmed her son. The family became nervous and decided to turn back. By the time they got to the next village, a crowd was waiting for them. Videos of the following attack were circulated widely online. They were stripped naked and beaten with wooden sticks. WhatsApp’s design makes it easy to spread false information. The kidnap warnings mainly appeared to come from friends and family. However, many messages are shared in groups, and when they are forwarded, there is no indication of their origin. The public must be knowledgeable about media and how false facts can easily be circulated.

Media literacy helps people to use critical thinking skills about a specific range of issues. Because of this, there is a great chance that fake news could possibly be reduced to a certain extent. Considering how easily the internet media can be accessed, readers must view cautiously and never believe what they are looking at until proven reliable because it could lead to serious violence. Whether it be strictly professional or just an everyday decision the smallest piece of misinformation can cause someone to buy something they originally never would’ve. Believing fake news is real can stop a business individually from making a wise investment or other money-related decisions. Finance is stressful enough for society. Trying to figure out a budget, balancing wants versus needs, what you should be saving for retirement, and keeping up on monthly bills are all already very difficult decisions. Throwing in fake financial news only helps to create a large amount of stress for the regular citizen. Researchers have discovered that false stories on financial websites can sway stock markets one way or another and impact trading levels. The risk of making an impulsive financial decision in reaction to a headline or article that may be designed to mislead has the potential to cause serious problems. Acting quickly does not allow the proper time to think a decision through and weigh the long and short-term financial implications.

A major issue of false marketing relates to the fitness industry and thousands of Canadians fall victim to this trap. We see countless ads promising major fat loss or muscle gain and think we could never fall from a scam this big. However, with the media overflowing us with these ads and showing us fake results, we are trained to believe that we can turn into what we see. The unrealistic end goals make viewers feel they are stout and need to have whatever the ad is providing. And that craving the fake stories provides plays a huge role in getting average adults in spending hundreds of dollars on frivolous products. Advertisers use fake news depending on the specific situation and the end goal is to mainly make money off you. Whether it is getting you to buy a product, invest in a stock, or simply just viewing the ad. Viewers are swayed into seeing false information to tap into their psychological needs and fall into whatever they are viewing. The fitness industry is a billion-dollar industry that mainly relies on the help of false marketing and convincing viewers that whatever there selling works. When nine times out of ten their product is not proven to actually work and is just based on false reviews. Spotting false marketing is elusive but viewers should be aware of the financial effects of fake news. When making important financial decisions it is important to not rush into your decision and make sure it is backed up by reliable information. As a result of fake news having a negative impact on society, average citizens experience unexpected changes in political opinions, violence based on unreliable information, and impractical financial decisions. Political views rely mainly on what a viewer is fed by the media and fake stories can easily sway a person’s opinion. Violence based on rumor might seem like a high school story but it happens often throughout many fields based on false information. Whether it be a business investor or a grocery store consumer the way our money is spent can easily be swayed by a small piece of false marketing.

Misinformation can be very difficult to correct and may have lasting effects even after it has been discredited. For example, after Hilary Clinton’s alleged pedophile ring was proven to be fake it was already too late for Donald Trump had already won the elections. As an active voting citizen, it is important to always source-check an article you could be reading on a running candidate, especially during election time. The easiness of spreading fake news makes everyone a possible victim of coming across an article that can change your whole view on a topic and this is not good. Situations like these could lead to danger and harm as seen in the incident of pizza gate. A gunman took multiple shots at an innocent man and could’ve killed someone based on an unreliable article he viewed. In multiple other incidents around the world, false rumors can lead to serious violence and have led to murder many times in the past.

High school rumors were bad enough and stirred up a lot of drama and led to many fights. But with the technological advances we have recently seen, imagine the damage that could be caused by fake news on the internet media. It is important to never lead to violence based on something you heard or read that is unreliable. In addition, the new programs social media offer now such as Facebook and Instagram make it very easy for ads to be shown to you based on what you like. This manipulative act may seem harmless but affects your life in many ways. These ads often contain false marketing that is meant to convince you of falling for whatever is being offered. This can lead to someone making impulsive financial decisions and losing out on some serious money. In theory, a reader should not be immediately influenced by what they encounter. Sadly, the way technology is starting to be a huge role in society this is the sad truth. Being cautious of what a reader is reading and locating specific information that can be identified as reliable, will help eliminate this problem. Fake news is simply just another way of categorizing bad journalism.

We’ve used the word ‘fake news’ so many times that it’s lost its significance in the real world. It is the deliberate misrepresentation of fact and the distortion of propaganda masquerading as true news. It may manifest itself in various forms, such as hoaxes, slander, and misinformation being disseminated as accurate information for technical, political, or civil purposes. It differs from editorials or journals in that they are organized in a systematic manner. Fake news intentionally attempts to appear as true news when it is not. It can aggravate ordinary citizens, officials, and governments and has the potential to confuse schools, institutions, and hospitals. Fake news may spread hatred towards religion, politics, individuals, or government agencies, resulting in disturbances. We can’t even predict the emergence of fake news, but in the 15th century, a Catholic priest in France spread false information about Jews living in France who were kidnapping and killing children. This resulted in the murder of 15 Jews in a single day, and the false information spread to other parts of the city, killing more Jews. Furthermore, fake news can also cause conflict between countries. For example, when the Malaysian airline MH-17 was shot down in Ukraine by Russian rocket launchers, the Russian government blamed the Ukrainian government for the attacks, despite the fact that the attacks were carried out by Russian separatists which led to tense situations between countries. As long as humans have incorrect information in the press, fake news is nothing new. Fake news has become a threat to journalism and the media because it forces them to confront any situation that is not right and is a hoax. It may expend considerable effort to delete such news that lacks a source or whose editor has not been checked. Nowadays, the entire world is fed up with false news, which acts as a nuclear bomb, exploding with such force that it destroys anything nearby or miles away, and people may be injured as a result. We must confront and resolve any situation, but this is not always possible without the assistance of others. Hence, we must stand together to tackle fake news and completely eradicate it from the world.

As misinformation spreads far and wide, journalists and organizations have taken numerous actions on this matter. Journalists must possess appropriate skills and a high level of professionalism is needed to curb the spreading of false news. This was stressed by resource persons on the role of journalists in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), in the context of information disorder and digital literacy, during the Workshop on Addressing Fake News on March 21, 2019. Moreover, Kavi Chongkittavorn, a veteran Thai journalist, also advised journalists to avoid ‘adding color’ and ‘dramatizing’ the news and instead concentrate on improving their skills, especially fact-checking. Dr. Masato Kajimoto, assistant professor at the University of Hong Kong’s Journalism and Media Studies Centre, reinforced the Thai media practitioner’s comments, emphasizing the importance of journalists thinking about how they report stories. Verification, freedom, accountability, and openness are all elements of professional journalism. Kajimoto also emphasized the importance of verification, emphasizing the need for all to be able to do fact-checking. Governments held public hearings, updated existing laws, proposed legislation, especially on cybersecurity and fake news, and instituted severe punishments, such as one to 12 years in prison and fines ranging from USD62,000 to USD123,000. In the meantime, non-legal interventions include the creation of task forces or organizations to track online discourses, the development of fact-checking websites, and the implementation of media literacy programs. In the Philippines, for example, the government has many programs through the Presidential Communications and Operations Office (PCOO) that educate people on how to recognize and fight the dissemination of false news and disinformation. Among these services are Real Numbers, a campaign that provides the real score and presents reliable numbers of the Duterte administration’s anti-illegal drugs drive; the Provincial Communications Officers Network, a platform that connects the national government to local government units; and Dismiss Misinformation, a campaign that combats the dissemination of false news and disinformation.

Debunking such statements necessitates extensive analysis, fact-checking, and media forensics. These are only a few of the many places where misinformation can have an impact. For that reason, a plan for intervention should be considered. There are three important How’s to remember: How to recognize misinformation, how to handle fake news and misinformation, and how to report fake news and misinformation. Recognizing misinformation in any social media platform has a clear bias and an attempt to elicit anger or other strong emotions from the reader. Such content could come from an unfamiliar news outlet, and the news itself could be entirely illogical. For example, if a news story alerts readers of an approaching ‘category six’ hurricane poised to devastate huge areas of the country, it should be met with raised eyebrows rather than alarm; there is no such thing as a category six hurricane. Once you’ve identified a suspicious piece of information, look into the publisher and author. Is one of these people well-known? Are they regarded as reliable sources? If not, do they cite their sources — and if so, are they credible? Fake author names and bogus references are often used in fake news. If the site has a history of making dubious statements, or if specifics in the author bio don’t seem reliable (or if a bio is missing), you can proceed with caution. For more information on the publication, visit the site’s ‘About Us tab. You may find any suspicious information. To assess the veracity of their statements, cross-reference these facts with credible news outlets. Remember that handling fake news and misinformation is not just disagreeing with content — it is distorted information intended to exploit others. If you are certain that the content fits this description, proceed with caution when sharing it with others. Sharing it so that you can comment on it isn’t helpful; although it allows you to voice your complaints, it also spreads the information. Rather than spreading false information, your aim should be to disregard and prevent it. You should take action if you come across fake news or misinformation while searching your social media feeds. You can ‘hide’ a trending post if it contains incorrect information. Block individual users who appear in your stream on a regular basis and share misinformation or disinformation. Unfollow any pages you’ve already ‘liked’ or subscribed to that are spewing out false news. Pruning your feeds in this way will help you avoid manipulative posts and profiles. On social media, the choices for customizing your news feed vary depending on the platform. The three most well-known social media platforms are Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. It is important that you spend time learning the ins and outs of your news feeds and how you customize your media intake, making the effort will significantly boost your online experience and reduce the impact of fake news on you. There are steps you can take to report misinformation on social media. While not all social media platforms have specifically established rules for fake news, you can research the procedure on how to report it which varies by the platform if the misinformation is abusive or harmful.

References:

1. Bondoc, B. (2019, March 22). Quality journalism is key to fighting fake news. Retrieved April 30, 2021, from https:www.pna.gov.pharticles1065304
2. Isseroff, A. (2005). Blood libel. Retrieved April 30, 2021, from https:zionism-israel.comdicblood_libel.htm
3. MailOnline, M. (2014, July 20). Malaysia Airlines MH17 ‘shot Down’ over Ukraine CARRYING 295 people. Retrieved April 30, 2021, from https:www.dailymail.co.uknewsarticle-2696161BREAKING-NEWS-Malaysian-passenger-plane-carrying-295-people-crashes-Ukraine-near-Russian-border.html

According to McNair (2017, p. 38), fake news is “intentional disinformation (invention or falsification of known facts) for political and/or commercial purposes, presented as real news.” The ‘fake news’ phenomenon is an important issue to address as it has sparked social, cultural, and political issues within the twenty-first century (McNair 2017). For example, political concerns arising from ‘fake news’ were significantly evident during the 2016 presidential election, where Allcott and Gentzkow (2017, p. 213) estimated that “the average adult saw and remembered 1.14 fake stories.” Within this essay, I will critically examine what can be classified as ‘fake news’, particularly focusing on the concerns associated with false, fabricated information which is intended to deceive. The potential impacts resulting from the dissemination of fake news will be discussed, as well as the primary motivations for publishing false information. In addition, ways in which the media can address the challenges presented by the spread of false information will be compared and evaluated. In order for our society to function democratically, it is necessary that the most effective strategies to tackle ‘fake news’ are identified and put into action.

Firstly, it is essential to acknowledge different explanations defining ‘fake news’. For example, Allcott and Gentzkow (2017, p. 213) define ‘fake news’ as “news articles that are intentionally and verifiably false.” In this case, Allcott and Gentzkow (2017) are primarily concerned with information that is identifiably false, fabricated, and deceiving, thus obtaining the potential to mislead readers. The ‘fake news’ phenomenon can also be associated with hoaxes, parody and satire, state propaganda, and other forms of manipulated content (McNair 2017). It has been implied that there are two leading motivations behind the production of fake news, which include gaining profit from advertising revenue, as well as ideological motivations that are focused on political gain (Allcott and Gentzkow 2017; Brummette et al. 2018). Despite these identifiable purposes, ‘fake news’ may be published for a variety of reasons. Satirical websites, such as The Onion, strive to create humor through the production of “bizarre stories which they often produced under the influence of commercial pressures” (McNair 2017, p. 34). Although there are debates as to whether parody and satire should be classified as ‘fake news’, Brummette et al. (2018, p. 499) argue that it remains a “popular and accepted form.”

Arguably, it is equally as important to highlight what should not be classified as fake news. A key example is that information that is perceived to be biased, and may consequently be disagreed with, should not be labeled as ‘fake news’ (McNair 2017, p. 37). Since the 2016 presidential election, politicians have increasingly been using the term ‘fake news’ to their advantage. According to McNair (2017), politicians use the term to attack media organizations and journalists presenting a negative media image of them, in an attempt to harm their reputable status. Brummette et al. (2018, p. 497) support this view, stating: “Social media users from opposing political parties communicate in homophilous environments and use “fake news” to disparage their opposition.” It also remains important to consider that not all misleading information is purposefully fabricated in an attempt to deceive. This is why unintentional reporting mistakes resulting from human error should not be considered ‘fake news’ (Allcott and Gentzkow 2017; McNair 2017). These mistakes are significantly less problematic in relation to false information published intentionally by troll factories and unreliable media organizations intending to generate profit and political gain. Likewise, conspiracy theories should also not be regarded as ‘fake news’ (Allcott and Gentzkow 2017; McNair 2017).

On another note, it remains essential to identify strategies that will allow the media to address the challenges presented by the dissemination of fake news. It has been proposed by Cooper (2017) that one solution to the fake news phenomenon could be the introduction of an ‘auto logic checker’. The application would act in a similar way to a spell-checker, with its’ main purpose being to highlight conflicting evidence or bad logic (Cooper, 2017). However, the main problem with this proposed strategy is that it uses crowdsourced data, and as Cooper (2017, para. 10) states: “Building a community of people to create the supporting data is harder than building the technology.” An alternative approach could be to encourage the use of fact-checking and general warnings, as suggested by Clayton et al. (2019). The potential impact of placing “rated false” or “disputed” tags on headlines has been considered, with research suggesting that false headlines are viewed as less reliable and trustworthy if they have been tagged with a general or specific warning (Clayton et al., 2019). Although this strategy undeniably has potential, Clayton et al. (2019, p.18) suggested that an “unintended spillover effect” may consequently occur as a result of placing general warnings on headlines, whereby the public may become more skeptical of the accuracy of headlines that are true. This emphasizes how the growing presence of ‘fake news’ online is encouraging a significant decline in trust in journalism, as emphasized by Allcott and Gentzkow (2017).

Arguably, there will be challenges associated with any strategy that the media may implement to tackle the ‘fake news phenomenon.’ For example, De keersmaecker and Roets (2017) suggested that the cognitive ability of individuals plays a substantial role in correcting and weakening the impacts of false information. It has been argued that “the influence of incorrect information cannot simply be undone by pointing out that this information was incorrect” (De keersmaecker and Roets 2017, p. 110). Through considering this statement, it can be implied that the proposed solution of placing general and specific warning tags on headlines, as suggested by Clayton et al. (2019), may be ineffective in changing attitudes toward false information. The study found that false information obtained by those with lower levels of cognitive ability had a persistent negative influence on their attitudes, with this negative impact remaining even after being told that the information read was false (De keersmaecker and Roets 2017, p. 109). Using the conclusions from this study, it can be suggested that media organizations should place a greater focus on gatekeeping and filtering out any information or content which is identifiably false, rather than attempting to tackle the problem after the false information becomes viral online. This remains crucial, especially during periods of political debate where individuals are vulnerable to their political views being manipulated as a result of the consumption of fake news articles. During the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election, there was “a database of 156 election-related news stories that were categorized as false by leading fact-checking websites” (Allcott and Gentzkow 2017, p. 212). It has been argued that the circulation of these false news stories had a significant influence on the views and opinions of the electorate (Allcott and Gentzkow 2017; McNair 2017).

Another significant point to consider is that the enforcement of laws and monitoring regulations, despite their efforts to control the dissemination of false information, can have negative impacts on society. A key example is how the introduction of an anti-fake news law in Singapore has restricted freedoms (Wong, 2019). The aim of these proposed laws and enforcements is to tackle the actions of trolls, fake accounts, and bots that mimic human behavior and may contribute towards the practice of astroturfing. Punishments include “penalties of up to S$ 1 million (£563,000, $733,700) and a jail term of up to 10 years” (Wong 2019). With rapid technological development, however, threats of punishments and fines may prove to be ineffective. For example, McNair (2017, p. 81) emphasizes the difficulty in finding the publisher responsible for the spread of false, fabricated content. Troll factories and other publishers of ‘fake news’ can gain access to technology and tools which aid the sustainment of their anonymity (McNair 2017, p. 81). This suggests that identifying those responsible for publishing ‘fake news articles and misleading content will not be a quick and simple approach to combatting the presence of false information intended to deceive.

Reflecting again on strategies undertaken in Singapore, Wong (2019) emphasizes how civil liberties may be threatened through the controversial policing of online platforms. Restricting the free flow of information is an approach that should not be taken lightly. As suggested by Brummette et al. (2018, p. 511): owners and founders of social media should make an effective practice out of using their platforms in a way that creates a productive democratic society.

In conclusion, it can be argued that there is not one set definition for what can be classified as ‘fake news.’ There is, however, a mutual agreement that ‘fake news’ can be defined as the intentional publication of false information (Allcott and Gentzkow 2017; McNair 2017; Brummette et al. 2018). It is also apparent that founders of media organizations should place a greater focus on gatekeeping. Filtering through content displaying misleading information and clickbait should be undertaken as, according to De keersmaecker and Roets (2017), attitudes and opinions can be misled by false information even after the reader realizes that this information is incorrect. Using a greater range of fact-checking and verification techniques would enable the use of fact-check tags and general warnings on headlines, as suggested by Clayton et al. (2019), to be more effectively implemented. After comparing a range of potential strategies, it can be suggested that there is no straightforward solution to addressing the challenges arising from the fake news phenomenon. As reflected in the enforcement of laws and monitoring in Singapore, Wong (2019) emphasized how restricting the free flow of information can inhibit personal freedoms and social media use. Consequently, there is the potential risk that media organizations and social media platforms may use excessive control in an attempt to resolve arising problems from ‘fake news’ (Wong 2019). This may exacerbate the situation as a result.

Bibliography

1. Allcott, H. and Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), pp.211–236.
2. Brunette, J., DiStaso, M., Vafeiadis, M. and Messner, M. (2018). Read All About It: The Politicization of “Fake News” on Twitter. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(2), pp.497–517.
3. Clayton, K., Blair, S., Busam, J.A., Forstner, S., Glance, J., Green, G., Kawata, A., Kovvuri, A., Martin, J., Morgan, E., Sandhu, M., Sang, R., Scholz-Bright, R., Welch, A.T., Wolff, A.G., Zhou, A. and Nyhan, B. (2019). Real Solutions for Fake News? Measuring the Effectiveness of General Warnings and Fact-Check Tags in Reducing Belief in False Stories on Social Media. Political Behavior, [online] pp.1–23. Available at: https://www.dartmouth.edu/~nyhan/fake-news-solutions.pdf [Accessed 27 Apr. 2019].
4. Crispin Cooper (2017). Could an auto-logic checker be the solution to the fake news problem? [online] The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/could-an-auto-logic-checker-be-the-solution-to-the-fake-news-problem-73223 [Accessed 26 Nov. 2019].
5. De keersmaecker, J. and Roets, A. (2017). ‘Fake news’: Incorrect, but hard to correct. The role of cognitive ability on the impact of false information on social impressions. Intelligence, 65, pp.107–110.
6. Jang, S.M. and Kim, J.K. (2018). Third person effects of fake news: Fake news regulation and media literacy interventions. Computers in Human Behavior, [online] 80, pp.295–302. Available at: https://www-sciencedirect-com.abc.cardiff.ac.uk/science/article/pii/S0747563217306726 [Accessed 27 Mar. 2019].
7. Manzi, D.C. (2019). Managing the misinformation marketplace: the first amendment and the fight against fake news. Fordham Law Review, 87(6), pp.2623–2651.
8. McNair, B. (2018). Fake news : falsehood, fabrication, and fantasy in journalism. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
9. Wong, T. (2019). Singapore’s fake news law policies chats and online platforms. BBC News. [online] 9 May. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-48196985 [Accessed 27 Nov. 2019].

There is no doubt that elections and democracy play a major role in the lives of Canadians. However, it is apparent that the issue of fake news is a rising epidemic that has threatened to harm and disrupt democracy by spreading disinformation, with the goal to alter the democratic process and affect election outcomes. Fake news is false information that is created and spread with the objective to mislead people and develop confusion and mistrust amongst people, in a political aspect (Fake news: Disinformation in Canada, 2019). Although many people have become aware of fake news in recent years, it has been around since ancient Rome. During ancient Rome, fake news was used by politicians to turn the public against one’s political rival (Fake news: Disinformation in Canada, 2019). There are three different types of fake news, which are misinformation, disinformation, and mal-information. Misinformation is a form of fake news that is referred to as fake news that is not intended to mislead people (Fake news: Disinformation in Canada, 2019). Disinformation refers to fake news that is purposely fake news, with the intention to manipulate people. Mal-information is fake news that is directed and intended to harm a particular group of people (Fake news: Disinformation in Canada, 2019). All three of these forms of fake news pose as major threats to the democratic processes in many countries. Fake news became particularly dangerous to Canadians during the 2019 Canadian election, in which the Canadian public became vulnerable to fake news that was being used to spread deceptions of political events and statements by political figures, with the intent to manipulate voters and lead them to vote a certain way. Overall, it is evident that fake news in Canada harms Canadian democracy by discrediting mainstream media, disrupting election campaigns, and falsely misleading voters. This is done by the spreading of fake news through social media, the use of advanced technology, and the statements made by high-profile political leaders such as Andrew Scheer.

Mainstream media plays a major role in politics, as it is able to deliver important statements of political leaders and what each Canadian political party stands for, to the public. Many Canadians turn to mainstream media to gather facts about the Canadian election, which means that mainstream media helps voters gain a stronger understanding of each Canadian political party and what they stand for. Therefore having a significant impact on the way eligible voters will vote. Mainstream media has also aided Canadians in being more aware of harmful fake news, as it has managed to link fake news back to social networking sites, such as Twitter. (Al-Rawi, Groshek, & Zhang, 2018, 53). The social media site Twitter is extremely popular and has a very strong influence on its users. Twitter particularly is favored for political discussions, as many high-profile politicians such as Donald Trump, Doug Ford, Andrew Sheer, and Justin Trudeau are amongst those who use this site. Twitter makes it simple for people to express their political opinions, beliefs, views, and values. However, this also means that this social media platform can be used to easily spread fake news, which will harm Canadian democracy by discrediting mainstream media. According to a study by Ahmed Al-Rawi (2018), fake news is often created on Twitter by selecting main topics in politics and taking the most frequent terms and phrases from statements in order to reconstruct these statements by making them seem legitimate (691). Thus, those who read these statements on Twitter will believe these false statements. Furthermore, a study conducted by Ahmed Al-Rawi, Jacob Groshek, and Li Zhang (2018), gathered tweets using the hashtag fake news from January 3 to May 7, 2018 (53). Many of these tweets that contained the hashtag fake news, falsely claimed to be associated with major Canadian mainstream media sources. This included CBC News and Global News, which are two of Canada’s major mainstream media television networks that followed the 2019 Canadian election very closely and constantly reported on it (#Fakenews is being used to discredit mainstream media coverage of the 2019 Canadian election, 2019). Many Canadians turned to CBC News and Global News to gather information on the federal election in regard to political events and statements by political leaders. However, since these major mainstream media television networks were constantly associated on Twitter with the hashtag fake news, it ultimately created mistrust among Canadians who viewed these networks. According to an article, the fake news tag on Twitter is often used as a “tool to wage personal attacks on politicians that ultimately enhances political polarization and echo chamber, while Canadian mainstream media is sometimes unjustifiably attacked with fake news accusations” (#Fakenews is being used to discredit mainstream media coverage of the 2019 Canadian election, 2019). Therefore, fake news has proven to be harmful to Canadian democracy as it discredits Canadian mainstream media, such as CBC News and Global News.

Technology is a useful tool that has become a major part of society and continues to advance. A form of technology that has significantly advanced is automated robots. Although such forms of technology can be used for positive purposes in society, they can also, however, be used for negative purposes as well. Advanced technology has been used to disrupt Canadian election campaigns by spreading fake news, which is harmful to democracy. For instance, a study found that robots were being used by political figures and governments internationally, to spread false information in order to sway the public and collect more votes by deceiving eligible voters (Al-Rawi, Groshek, & Zhang, 2018, p. 53). These robots are able to continuously send tweets at fast rates to multiple users at a time. Therefore a high number of people will read the fake news that is being distributed, which is harmful to democracy. For instance, multiple Twitter robots were found to be spreading the hashtag “Trudeau must go”, ahead of the 2019 Canadian federal election. Many of these accounts were discovered to be tweeting up to a hundred times a day and successfully manipulated people, as many users began retweeting the tweets of fake accounts (Fake Twitter accounts push hashtag #TrudeauMustGo: Report, 2019). This was detrimental to Trudeau’s election campaign because as a result of the fast-spreading hashtag, many people jumped on the bandwagon due to the high number of tweets that were supporting the hashtag, not knowing that the accounts that were spreading this disinformation were robots and not people. According to a study, it is therefore apparent that such advanced forms of technology are able to “enable key policy actors to bypass government organizations, regulations, and programs in imagining and creating policy alternatives, highlighting the ignorance of not just the public but also many policy-makers with these new technologies” (Perl, Howlett, & Ramesh, 2019, p. 587). Additionally, disinformation and misinformation harms Canadian democracy as it has become a “socio-cultural technology-enabled epidemic in digital news, propagated via social media” (Rubin, 2018, p. 1013). This is apparent because since fake news is an issue that many people have become aware of in recent years, many experts are still researching it and discovering how it is able to harm election campaigns. According to a study, internet robots play a major role in this issue and these robots are able to “drive the diffusion of misinformation” (Ruths, 2019, p. 348). Therefore, it is clear that fake news harms Canadian democracy by using advanced technology to disrupt election campaigns.

Political leaders of political parties in Canada will often publically discuss political statements, events, what they will do for Canada if they win, and how they will improve the quality of life for Canadians if they win. However, in addition to discussing what they will do as leaders, some politicians also use their power to spread disinformation and misinformation about other political leaders and events in an attempt to falsely mislead voters to increase their own chances of getting elected. This is very harmful to democracy because it will disrupt and alter the Canadian democratic process. For instance, the Conservative party released statements on social media to announce that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was officially under investigation by the RCMP for the SNC-Lavalin scandal (Conservatives forced to delete tweet alleging Trudeau under RCMP investigation, 2019). After the Conservative party released this statement about their rival, Conservative party leader Andrew Scheer himself was quoted at a campaign gathering saying “The RCMP is contacting people in his office about his role in the SNC-Lavalin affair” (Conservatives forced to delete tweet alleging Trudeau under RCMP investigation, 2019). However, the RCMP came forward and clarified that this was in fact, false information. This was proven to be harmful because not only did the Conservative party spread misinformation on social media, but leader Andrew Scheer himself publically spread misinformation on camera. Many people would see this footage and see the statements on social media of the misinformation, which could result in Canadians developing mistrust of Justin Trudeau, his campaign, and the Liberal party. Thus it is apparent that this fake news could have easily misled and manipulated Canadians to believe that the RCMP was investigating Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, had the RCMP not clarified that it was in fact, false. Moreover, Gabrielle Lim, who is a researcher at the Date and Society Research Institute, has said “They should be very wary of the type of information they are sharing, the information their candidates are sharing because we often find that comes back to the leader as backlash” (Jackson, 2019). Therefore, it is clear that fake news can be spread via statements and posts made by politicians and political parties, which is proven to be harmful to Canadian democracy as it falsely misleads voters.

It is evident that fake news has negatively impacted Canadian democracy and has had a major impact, as many Canadians became vulnerable to disinformation and misinformation. Likewise, the United States also deals with the issue of fake news as it became a major problem during the 2016 American election. This election made many Americans question their own democracy as it was revealed that other countries such as Russia led by Putin, were accused to have swayed the results of the 2016 election. The Russian government was accused to have enforced public mistrust in American democracy by spreading fake news via social media in favor of Donald Trump (Peters, 2017, p. 1161). Moreover, fake news became a major topic during Donald Trump’s campaign. During Trump’s campaign, he publically labeled multiple major mainstream media news companies as “fake news”. Amongst these labeled fake news by Donald Trump are CNN, The New York Times, and The Washington Post (Al-Rawi, 2018, p. 697). Many people took notice that Trump would label any media source that criticized him and his campaign as fake news, thus discrediting multiple sources. According to an article by CBS News, Trump was reported to have said, “I do it to discredit you all and demean you all so when you write negative stories about me, no one will believe” (Lesley Stahl: Trump admitted mission to “discredit” press, 2018). This demonstrates how fake news can harm democracy and journalism. Fake news discredits mainstream media and by doing so creates mistrust in the public, which can lead to citizens turning their backs on mainstream media and instead turning to fake news. Also, fake news harms journalism and journalists because when consumers hear high-profile politicians such as Donald Trump, claiming that certain mainstream media sources are spreading disinformation, then they are highly likely to stop paying for those newspapers and stop watching those news channels (Long, Richardson, & Stahler, 2019, p. 313). This can result in journalists losing their jobs.

It is apparent that fake news is harmful to Canadian democracy, as many Canadians have been manipulated. Thus, it is crucial for possible solutions and interventions to be identified and implemented in order to protect democracy. According to a study “a system of education and advocacy, which will empower the population with the literacy and knowledge to identify misinformation” (Rochlin, 2017, p. 391). This would be very beneficial for democracy since many Canadians are not able to recognize and identify misinformation and disinformation. Further, deepening our knowledge of the impacts of fake news will help advance the democratic process in a global and digital context (Guitton, 2019, p. 176). In addition, an article by the Globe and Mail suggests a possible intervention and solution could be “a well-funded and ongoing research program to keep tabs on the evolving networks and methods of anti-democratic forces” (Greenspon & Owen, 2017). Thus, it is apparent that many want to combat this issue and encourage our government to take action in order to protect Canadian democracy.

In conclusion, it is evident that fake news in Canada harms Canadian democracy by discrediting mainstream media, disrupting election campaigns, and falsely misleading voters. This is done by the spreading of fake news through social media, the use of advanced technology, and even through statements made by high-profile political leaders such as Andrew Scheer. Harmful fake news can result in various problems for democratic countries as it threatens to create a separation between groups of eligible voters or between voters and a certain political party (Baccarella, Wagner, Kietzmann, & McCarthy, 2018, p. 435). Therefore, it is clear that the Canadian government must take action in order to solve and intervene in this issue, as it has disrupted the Canadian democratic process and election outcomes.

References

1. Al-Rawi, A. (2018). Gatekeeping fake news discourses on mainstream media versus social media. Social Science Computer Review, 37(6), 687-704. doi: 10.1177/0894439318795849
2. Al-Rawi, A., Groshek, J., & Zhang, L. (2018). What is the fake? Assessing the extent of networked political spamming and bots in the propagation of #fakenews on Twitter. Online Information Review, doi: 10.1108/OIR-02-2018-0065 43(1), 53-71.
3. Baccarella, C. V., Wagner, T. F., Kietzmann J. H., & McCarthy, I.P. (2018). Social media? It’s serious! Understanding the dark side of social media. European Management Journal, doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2018.07.002 36(4), 431-438.
4. CBC News. (2019). Conservatives forced to delete tweet alleging Trudeau under RCMP investigation. Retrieved from https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tories-delete-rcmp-tweet-1.5287471
5. CBS News. (2018). Lesley Stahl: Trump admitted mission to “discredit” press. Retrieved from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lesley-stahl-donald-trump-said-attacking-press-to-discredit-negative-stories/
6. CTV News. (2019). Fake Twitter accounts push hashtag #TrudeauMustGo: Report. Retrieved from https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/fake-twitter-accounts-push-hashtag-trudeaumustgo-report-1.4514237
7. Guitton, M. J. (2019). Facing cyber threats: Answering the new security challenges of the digital age. Computers in Human Behaviour, 95(1), 175-176. doi 10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.017
8. Greenspon, E., & Owen T. (2017, May 28). Fake news 2.0: A threat to Canada’s democracy. The Globe and Mail Inc. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/fake-news-20-a-threat-to-canadas-democracy/article35138104/
9. Jackson, H. (2019, September 22). Experts warn of disinformation during the election but say political attack ads are within legal limits. Global News. Retrieved from https://globalnews.ca/news/5907430/canada-election-combating-disinformation/
10. Long, N. V., Richardson, M., & Stahler, F. (2019). Media, fake news, and debunking. Economic Record, doi: 10.1111/1475-4932.12487 95(310), 312-324.
11. Perl, A., Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (2018). Policy-making and truthiness: Can existing policy models cope with politicized evidence and willful ignorance in a “post-fact” world? Policy Sciences, doi: 10.1007/s11077-018-9334-4 51(4), 581-600.
12. Peters, M. A. (2017). The information wars, fake news, and the end of globalization. Education Philosophy and Theory, 50(13), 1161-1164. doi: 10.1080/00131857.2017.1417200
13. Rochlin, N. (2017). Fake news: Belief in post-truth. Library Hi Tech, 35(3), 386-392. doi: 10.1108/LHT-03-2017-0062
14. Rubin, V. L. (2019). Disinformation and misinformation triangle: A conceptual model for “fake news” epidemic, causal factors, and intervention. Journal of Documentation, 75(5), 1013-1034. doi 10.1108/JD-12-2018-0209.
15. Ruths, D. (2019). The misinformation machine. Science, 363(6425), 348-348. doi:
16. 10.1126/science.aaw1315.
17. The Canadian Encyclopedia. (2019). Fake news (disinformation in Canada). Retrieved from https://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/fake-news-in-canada
18. The Conversation. (2019). #Fakenews is being used to discredit mainstream media coverage of the Canadian election. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/fakenews-is-being-used-to-discredit-mainstream-media-coverage-of-the-canadian-election-125301

The term rhetoric means to be very persuasive whilst speaking or writing, it has been around since the dawn of philosophy. We have seen the fluidity of talking in many ways in which the same information whereas adding our own minuscule personal twist to that information. In doing this, we have a tendency to act out our audience, otherwise, it would presumably change the suggestions that they receive the info and wish on what proportion of a non-public twist. We have a tendency to verify if the info is that accurate and true. The appliance of one’s quality attributes and the appliance of one’s feeling is Pathos and conjointly the application of one’s argument is Logos. Rhetoric is a language used to steer the audience in many ways in which by utilizing the three formal approaches written on top.

Of the three formal approaches written earlier throughout this learning module, I feel that the appliance of the attribute would be the foremost effective approach for human action in associate degree extremely fashionable rhetoric state of affairs. An attribute is a degree approach accustomed to establishing the speaker’s quality. Through intelligence, character, and of fine will. The speaker ought to be very knowledgeable, give information to dependable sources, and conjointly the speaker has to understand the necessity of the precise audience completely. This approach may well be a better due to persuade your audience and keep them holding on to your every word. whereas utilizing this approach you are able to directly tailor your speech around your audience. this allows you to administer to the audience specifically what they came for and helps you produce believers in them by allowing them to look at you as somebody that’s responsive to what they’re talking concerning. It’s necessary that the audience feel they receive the info they needed and needed thus as for this approach to be very effective.

Boczkowski is saying that the influences of fake news on our current informational climate are inflicting excessive stress, and the superfluous commotion associated with a degree is inflicting the final public to reply in an extremely disagreeable manner. fake news publishers share information with the final public that’s credible primarily based on current things. I feel it’s done how to mislead, direct your thinking and force the final public to question everything so as that when the fact comes out it to ar questioned due to the fake news that was, in addition, given to enter the form of reporting the news. It doesn’t matter if is celebrity news, economic news, or political news. They feel drama sells and sadly the fake news reporters’ unit of measurement is correct. The approach to their mistreatment to report fake news is the application of one’s quality attributes, and conjointly the application of one’s feeling that’s Pathos. By reporting specifically what the world needs to concentrate on which they are careful to come up with the correct due to deliver the info at the correct time. place confidence in whenever they need the world to leap on the bandwagon for war, they inform of 9/11 or wholly completely different war zones that appeal to our emotions and force a reaction. Boczkowski is improbably discouraged concerning the near to means forward for journalism seeing that the end of the day of journalism is slowly destroying them. As Pablo Boczkowski said, “There is ambivalence toward an information infrastructure in which the barriers of access to having one’s voice heard are lower than in the past, and where the reach is potentially much broader. Second, there is a growing perception of limitations in the ability to detect bias in a media environment in which editorial selection increasingly relies on algorithms. Third, there is a crisis in the cultural authority of knowledge that affects not only journalism but other key institutions of modern life, including science, medicine, and education. Mainstream journalistic organizations would increasingly have to demonstrate to the public the veracity of the news — and denounce the falsity of alternative accounts — rather than take for granted that aspect of the reception experience”. With this being aforementioned, Journalists will have to be compelled to make sure their source’s unit of measurement is credible on every article unconcealed below their name and conjointly the cause ar the emergence of fake news.

As a client of data presently taking school courses, I will make sure my supplies unit of measurement is credible by asking my supply for physical proof for the news that they are reporting like footage, legally binding documents and police reports, etc. I feel their unit of measurement has several qualities an offer has to be compelled to have. It’s necessary to utilize very high-quality data and sources to help your quality. this could allow you to administer effective and correct information while reporting the news.

The consequences of fake news on Yank society are life-threatening. As a means of reporting fake news in today’s society, I feel it’s utilizing to force one’s means upon the world. It’s in addition accustomed flip the world against a certain angle or towards a certain angle wishing on the person reporting browse. among the planet today we have got people who cannot assume for themselves and allow the news to administer them a stance to face for or against. An associate degree example is the health care reform act. The Trump administration uses a definite name for Obama Care thus on urge the world to vote against it. I bear in mind hearing the nation say we would like to eliminate Obama Care and keep a budget for health care. Little or no did the national apprehend, there was one among an equivalent. Thus it’s very detrimental that we have the inclination to remember fake news and therefore the means we have the inclination to allow it to sway our purpose of browse among the planet. Social media has created it very accessible but has very much increased the spreading of fake news at the aspect of cellular phones and mobile devices that provides you access to sites like Reddit, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, etc. These sites were meant to help keep family and friends in touch with one another. Our affairs of state, personal information, or harassment shouldn’t be on social media.

I think it’s safe to say that everyone contains a platform to spread fake news in the world today. It’s terrible the fake news that’s being placed out into the world for people to constantly fall for it is appalling for our society. I usually am astounded by what’s occurring in one’s life that encourages such behavior to produce such a great deal of hate and sick things that share and cause drama or to speak pain upon others. People’s lives, careers, and lives are changed due to a variety of things denoted and shared. It’s one issue to report on celebrities for money or to propel their ratings up, but the info has to be enforced to be restricted. Fake news truly has and will retain an overlaying effect on the world.

Fake news is not a new concept anymore, in fact, it has been around from time to time that news began to be widely circulated by print. Recently, it has gained superiority in modern media. The next presidential election will be held on November 2020 which means the political heat has intensified even more than ever. On this occasion, it creates several unknown news widespread over the United States. In ‘Trump blasts ‘fake news’ polls, says internal numbers show him beating every 2020 Dem’, which is an article from Fox News written by Sam Dorman, showing that President Trump was behind Democratic candidates in the polls released lately for the 2020 Presidential campaign. The article responds to this claim because President Trump also claims that those polls are part of the fake news. Believe it or not, those polls have the ability to change the mentality of people on the existing political status of the candidates. Political poll shows that if a candidate is leading the poll, people may believe that the other candidates are not as highly rated by the majority. It could make people change their political stand. Some research also states that people are more likely to detect news more credible than fake news, which means it is difficult to control what people believe once mixed news is released to the public. That’s why those ‘fake news’ polls can change the point of view of each person in their political stand. The widespread news that cannot be verified has increased leading to reduced trust in the news articles that are posted online daily by various news outlets (Tandoc Jr, 137). The reduction in trust among even the major news outlets has increased due to the attacks, especially in President Trump’s administration.

Eddie begins his writing by straightly pointing out the truth that Coronavirus can no longer be contained. The credibility of his writing is well established by his intelligent tone. Eddie’s way of persuasion clarify his argument, he

Along with the spread of Coronavirus, Eddie also appeals to the readers’ emotions by bringing the most reasonable theory surrounding this pandemic, the government of China, unfortunately, released the virus. The fact that China didn’t publicize those infections but hide them from their own citizens might be they thought they could cover it up from the public. Until they couldn’t do it anymore, this pandemic has already spread throughout the world. That causes every country to lose their guards, and now it has become the biggest problem that even the US doesn’t have an answer to yet.

Overall, Eddie has persuasive writing in terms of describing how bad is the Coronavirus spreading a global scope right now and showing detail of evidence that China’s government tried to hide from the truth. He does a good job listing all evidence that shows and proves Coronavirus is one of the biggest problems at this time. But that is not all of it, besides that, Eddie brings up Coronavirus’s origin that which didn’t randomly happen but there is a dark side about China’s bioweapon to defeat America (e.g. to dominate the world).

Works Cited

1. Bader, Eleanor J. “Homeless on Campus.” The Norton Field Guide to Writing, edited by Richard Bullock, Maureen Daly Goggin, and Francine Weinberg, Norton, 2019. pp. 764-768.

In 2018, the French government enacted a law that allows judges to order the removal of fake news from social media platforms. “The law, conceived by President Emmanuel Macron, was rejected twice by the Senate before being passed by the parliament on Tuesday. It is considered Western Europe’s first attempt to officially ban false material. Macron has said he believes that the internet must be regulated” (Fiorentino, 2018). Fake news is a threat to democracy that’s why France and many other democratic countries have decided to ban it. It’s a threat as it creates mistrust between the people and the government. The voter turnout gets affected by the fake news as people don’t want to vote for the people who they believe to be lying all the time. Fake news is conceived, written, published, and disseminated for the purpose of swaying public opinion, in many cases towards the far political right (Burshtein, 2017). Fake news is also a “Singapore is the latest country to have passed a law against fake news, joining others like Germany, Malaysia, France, and Russia”(Schetzer, 2019). Fake news causes confusion and citizens are less informed about what is going on in the country and the world. “Fake news stories are constructed with the goal of drawing attention and are therefore often quite fantastical and implausible” (Pennycook, Rand, 2018). Fake news should be banned because it is biased and tries a push the political agenda and opinion of the maker.

Fake news has also caused increased skepticism about various medical practices such as vaccines. Many people around the world have questioned the effectiveness of vaccines due to the various fake news articles and populism. “This Medical misinformation is responsible for the largest measles outbreak in a quarter century” (Kalter, 2019). There is little evidence that vaccines cause any health problems in children, in fact, vaccines have helped in eliminating many diseases like polio and smallpox. The makers of fake news don’t care about the health of the millions of people around the world, but they only want to push their agenda putting millions at health risks. I believe that something that could lead to the spread of deadly diseases around the globe is not a threat to free speech and expression.

In conclusion, I would reiterate my arguments and why I believed that fake news should be banned. My first argument talked about the role of the government, the risks of violence, and other disruptions caused by fake news. My second argument revolves around the role of fake news in Trump’s win. In my last argument, I talked about the international government’s action in combating fake news and other issues caused by fake news. I am totally firm in my beliefs and don’t think that banning fake news is against freedom of speech and expression due to the reasons I discussed above.