The Classroom Where Fake News Fails is an article written in 2016 by Cory Turner and Kat Lonsdorf concerning fake news, which spread like flu in the winter, besides its consequences. In the article, Hunt discovered that her learners do not obtain from traditional channels like television or publications. Instead, they acquire it through social media, which they access through smartphones. Furthermore, students in elementary, high school and college are extraordinarily incompetent at recognizing fake news.
According to the study, school-based practice is needed to assist in fixing this issue. The authors indicate that many schools if not all, are not doing substantially enough to help pupils learn how to distinguish between fact and social media falsehood. With these assertions, I fully agree that fake news is usually gotten and spread through social media platforms. Furthermore, middle school, high school, and college students are the most notorious for identifying what is real and fake, what to forward, and what to post to their friends through their social media accounts. Perhaps we are entertained by made-up stories. They are usually titillating and spectacular, like gossip, and they frequently have a clear adversary they can blame. Fake news can be amusing and ridiculous at times. The thrill of fake news satisfies a desire to be free of the weight of our daily lives. Students are ill-equipped to assess the reliability of material found on the internet, and they still have trouble distinguishing facts from fake news.
As a definition, the news is information concerning current events. This can be done in various ways, including spoken word, postal systems, broadcast, printing, electronic communication, observer, and witness testimonies. According to the article, fake news has existed since the dawn of civilization. However, it has been accelerated by the Internet age and the restructuring of the international media environment. The propagation has numerous individual and scholarly implications.
All news reported in a perfect realm would only be founded on facts, and one would be in a position to believe the media they consume. However, and regrettably, this can not be the case. It is important to learn how to recognize incorrect information. Armed with this knowledge, my attitude about responding to the news in the future greatly changed. I must discern what is real and fake to avoid consuming and spreading fake news since it could negatively affect people in many ways. Since I get most news from the internet, I should verify first what is real and fake by checking the source and author and maintaining a critical mindset. Moreover, I would use fact-checking sites, checking for authentic images and comments to distinguish real from fake.
The rapid advancement of information technology brought many benefits in terms of speed of access to information and the rate of dissemination. Sharing platforms are a vital part of the contemporary democratic society as they allow any individual to share their thoughts and knowledge with the global network of connected people. However, such a wide range of opportunities caused adverse side effects in terms of the quality of distributed news, as they may feature inconsistencies and sometimes even deliberate delusion. On the one side, there is freedom of communication and speech, which is one of the fundamental pillars of modern democracy. On the other hand, however, there is an opportunity to distribute false information, which undermines democracy. Within the context of this dilemma, it seems that every individual bears the responsibility of being capable of identifying misleading knowledge. While some people apply their critical thinking skills ubiquitously, others fail to recognize that not all information should be considered valid and accurate. Jones-Jang, Mortensen, and Liu (2019), using previously accumulated knowledge of the scientific community, conducted research to identify what kind of skill is needed to identify fake news successfully. This reflective paper discusses the critical points of the study and how it fits into a broader context of current media systems. It also provides suggestions on how the findings may be utilized and how they may motivate further research.
Brief Overview of the Study
Main Problem
The researchers recognize that the phenomenon of misleading news has existed for a long time. It predates the age of information technology and has existed since the emergence of information as a concept. Therefore, battling deceptive knowledge and misleading news is a challenging endeavor and should be based on a systematic and thorough approach. To put the central problem that the researchers are studying into a proper context, they suggest that there are three dimensions where fake news should be combatted – the provider of the information, public judgment, and the audience. News providers may use their internal methods, sometimes algorithmic models, to filter the data of poor quality before delivering it to the people. Public judgment may help an individual decide if a piece of information is reliable and accurate through commentaries and evaluations. The researchers concentrate on the case of the audience – the skills and literacy required to distinguish between fake news and credible data.
Arguments
Many previously conducted studies on this topic motivate this research. Particularly, Mele et al. (2017) suggest that the current situation with fake news poses a significant threat to democratic institutions and values because more and more political opinion outlets are being disseminated through online media. The authors call for immediate action and claim that increasing the population’s media literacy is one of the ways of achieving the goals (Mele et al., 2017). Weakened media institutions should be supported by other dimensions of the media system – primarily, the audience (Mele et al., 2017). One of the main reasons why the public accepts fake news is misperceptions, as suggested by Flynn, Nyhan, and Reifler (2017). They are usually rooted in cognitive biases, and individuals with higher levels of knowledge are more likely to be able to resist such flawed argumentation (Flynn et al., 2017). Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that literacy interventions may be an effective way of counteracting fake news.
Key Findings
While supporting the claim that literacy interventions may positively impact the ability to identify fake news, the research results contradict the belief that any literacy type produces benefits. Life experience may also contribute to the identification of misleading news because age was found to be a significant predictor. However, previous experience with fake news is not shown to be correlated with identification capacity. Therefore, further research is required to determine why age is a critical factor. Among the four literacy scales, only information literacy was recognized to be positively correlated to fake news identification. Although claimed by other researchers, media literacy, news literacy, and digital literacy do not make any significant contributions to the false information identification process. This finding sets a new foundation for future scientific investigations because previous studies will have to be revised and reconstructed.
Surrounding Media Systems and Media Markets
Contemporary media systems heavily rely on IT infrastructure and the internet. Distribution of news today happens not only through the print medium but more significantly through websites and other digital sources. Social networks play a vital role in this context because much of the rumor and gossip is spread through such platforms. Such an abundance of possible distribution channels creates a substantial amount of opportunity for the emergence of fake news. The discussed research puts the studied problems within this diversified context and emphasizes, particularly, social media because of its alleged influence on the 2016 Presidential elections. Fake news identification becomes even more critical in the context of social networks because sites like Facebook and Twitter provide the most comfortable way possible to publish any information. There are no guarantees that algorithmic decisions made by these systems are reliable and error-prone.
Media Market
Because the study is motivated by the recent events in the political arena, it can be claimed that it fits into the context of sufficiently developed mass media. However, the reflected media market in the research is broad and generic because it does not account for local, regional, and national ratios. There is also no consideration about linguistic segmentation, gender differences in news reach, and whether there are distinct influences of bordering countries. Also, no information is provided on the circulation rates and reach. However, it can be inferred that the researchers reflected upon mass-media publications and social networks that are targeted at the general public with no specific attributes. Therefore, arguments made by other researchers regarding the fake news prevalence and distribution channels are applicable to this research.
Political Parallelism
While the discussed social media platforms and news sources are not exclusively politically oriented, the researchers do reflect upon political parallelism. Media content that is used in the study has the maximum extent of political orientation. The study also hints at organizational associations between political groups and the media. This claim can be inferred from the fact that the fake news mentioned in the research usually targets an opponent of some politician. Both internal and external pluralism exists within the discussed media as the publications do not undermine only one particular politician but various individuals. It can be presumed that there is no direct government control over the mass media, and the news providers are generally insulated from external political manipulation. However, these assumptions can be false because the absence of evidence does not mean there is no evidence at all.
Professionalization of Journalism
The presence of fake news says a lot about the professionalization of journalism in this country. The infrastructure required for the autonomous functioning of journalistic activities is well established. However, professional journalism is not only about a degree of autonomy but also about ethical principles and professional norms and rules that guide each specialist. As the primary objective of journalists is delivering an accurate representation of the current state of affairs, providing misleading and deceptive information is not only unethical but also unprofessional. Therefore, the conclusion is that there are some journalists that are not oriented at serving the public but are motivated by personal goals of achieving recognition or wealth. Such individuals undermine democratic principles and pose a severe threat to an informed citizenry and the freedom of choice.
Role of the Government
The research also reflects on the fact that the government has little role in the formation of media content. A high degree of pluralism indicates a low amount of stress on behalf of the political system. As authors of fake publications use any technique they want to undermine their target individual, there is no sign of censorship or other types of oppression. The fact that misleading news is posted in the media also supports this claim. Because the principle of freedom of speech is ubiquitous in the United States, the government is not the primary source of information. Instead, private newspapers and publishers, along with social network companies, serve as the principal information providers. There may be cases when the government provides subsidies to some news agencies, but this support is not enough to substantially influence the industry.
Theories and Models
There are four hypotheses predicted by the researchers and four associated models used to assess them. Each of these models is concerned with measuring one of the literacies that are deemed to influence fake news identification capabilities – media, information, news, and digital. These models are essentially a set of measures used in previous scientific works. In some cases, the researchers reduce the number of items used for measuring literacies to enhance the experience of respondents.
Inan and Temur, and Media Literacy
A comprehensive approach to measuring media literacy was proposed by Inan and Temur (2012). The original set of questions consisted of 65 items, and the primary aim of the study was to examine media literacy among prospective teachers that were studying at Dumlupinar University. Inan and Temur (2012) surveyed the literature on media literacy and composed a list of 65 questions. After reviewing for functionality and efficacy, the collection was divided into four sections that featured 53 items in total. The reliability of this method was estimated using Cronbach’s alpha, and the result was.85, which means the questions have high covariances. Inan and Temur (2012) relied on the conceptual framework for media literacy that was previously proposed by other researchers. For instance, much of the assumptions regarding media literacy are derived from Aufderheide’s definition of media literacy.
Information Literacy Test
The researchers employ Boh Podgornik et al.’s (2016) information literacy test (ILT) to measure the participants’ competency to find, evaluate, and use information. Boh Podgornik et al. (2016) were guided by the information literacy standards for higher education when developing the assessment model. The test consists of 40 multiple-choice questions with one correct and three incorrect answers. The reliability of the method is described by Cronbach’s alpha of 0.74 and Ferguson’s delta 0.97. These numbers show that the ILT is a robust tool for assessing information literacy and is relevant for the research. Because the study uses only five questions from the ILT, it is possible to measure the efficacy of literacy interventions using the rest of the items. For instance, the first ILT shows the initial level of information literacy, while subsequent tests indicate whether there are any improvements after applying particular literacy intervention strategies.
News Literacy Scale
News literacy is generally considered to be the most critical type of knowledge for fake news identification because it directly relates to consuming and understanding the news. Educational programs that facilitate news literacy are being introduced in schools and colleges. Ashley, Maksl, and Craft (2013) developed a scale that allows scholars to measure the level of news literacy. Previous scientific work on this concept is scarce, partly because there was no appropriate tool for assessing news literacy before Ashley et al.’s (2013) framework. From 15 scale items, Jones-Jang et al. (2019) used six that had the highest factor loading according to the framework’s developers. It is critical to note that the study’s results show that news literacy is not a significant contributor to fake news identification. This finding means that previous scientific work which predicted the positive correlation between news literacy and false news identification capabilities is flawed.
Digital Literacy Measure Index
Measuring digital skills is challenging because it is hard to generalize such abilities. However, Hargittai and Hsieh (2011) provide a conceptual framework for defining digital literacy and an index to measure it. This tool is based on the previous work of Hargittai, which viewed digital literacy as the application of web-oriented skills. Hargittai and Hsieh (2011) attempted to shorten the list of measured items to increase the convenience for respondents. Because longer indexes take more time to complete, it is not possible to use such measurement tools ubiquitously as not all people will be interested in completing them. Therefore, Hargittai and Hsieh (2011) analyzed the difference between the efficacies of longer and shorter lists. Jones-Jang et al. (2019) use the shorter version as no significant difference in reliability was found – 10 related internet terms from Hargittai and Hsieh’s index were utilized.
Key Learnings and Outcomes
There are three conclusions that we can make after reading the research paper. The first one is the main finding of the study – information literacy is a critical factor in the context of fake news identification. The other three hypotheses were not proved as they made no significant contributions to identification outcomes. The current literature on literacy as the key to battling false news should be revised.
The second conclusion is that we should develop intervention strategies that will increase the information literacy of the population. This increase can be facilitated by integrating the concept of information literacy into education programs. Courses and classes that teach students how to search, consume, and use information properly should be introduced to public education institutions. Maintaining the information literacy of the population is vital in supporting the democratic values of contemporary society.
The last conclusion that can be made from the results of the study is that skills that are generalizable to many areas of human activity are more critical than specialized skills. For instance, news literacy does not contribute to the capacity to identify misleading news, despite being specific to the field. Instead, information literacy that can be used ubiquitously is found to be a significant factor in fake news identification.
Impact of the Research
Jones-Jang et al. (2019) published their paper only several months ago. Therefore, this paper can be considered as a recent study. Because academic works need time to generate any volume of impact, this study has not yet resulted in further research or literature reviews. Currently, the research metrics show that this paper has not been cited in any other academic papers. Both Crossref and Web of Science are showing 0 article citations. However, the paper generated a substantial amount of interest from the scientific community because the number of downloads is relatively high. Within the next few years, it can be expected that related studies that use Jones-Jang et al.’s (2019) work as the foundation will emerge.
Currently, the article has an Altmetric score of 16, which means that the paper is being actively discussed on various social media platforms and being shared within the scientific community. Both scientists and journalists are expressing their interest in the material. This outcome can be determined by the demographic breakdown of users that downloaded the paper. Although the work has not been cited in other academic contributions, the article is mentioned in blog posts and tweets.
Importance of the Study in the Personal Context
As a person who actively supports democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of choice, and informed citizenry, I firmly believe that the involvement of the population in political processes is key to sustaining the democratic principles of this country. The research by Jones-Jang et al. (2019) showed what factors are critical in consuming news and making informed decisions. The study findings provide me with the necessary knowledge for approaching the mass media and absorbing information adequately. Prior to reading the article, I used to believe that media literacy was the most critical tool in battling manipulation and misleading information. However, Jones-Jang et al.’s (2019) interpretation of the study results motivates me to concentrate my efforts on learning the single most crucial skill set instead of disseminating my resources among different literacies. It also provides the foundation and motivation for further research in the field, in which I express my personal interest.
Conclusion
There were many theories and hypotheses related to the phenomenon of fake news. Throughout the many years of scientific research, scholars attempted to determine the correlation between various literacies and the ability to identify false information. This analyzed study rejects the most common assumptions about fake news identification. Primarily, it establishes that no literacy other than information literacy has a significant interrelationship with the capacity of distinguishing misleading news. The study proposes a new prism for viewing the factors associated with adequate assessment of information. This knowledge can be used to conduct further research on the development of intervention strategies in the form of educational programs and courses. This reflective paper viewed Jones-Jang et al.’s (2019) study in the context of surrounding media markets and systems and attempted to describe its potential implications.
References
Ashley, S., Maksl, A., & Craft, S. (2013). Developing a news media literacy scale. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 68(1), 7-21.
Boh Podgornik, B., Dolničar, D., Šorgo, A., & Bartol, T. (2016). Development, testing, and validation of an information literacy test (ILT) for higher education. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(10), 2420-2436.
Flynn, D. J., Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2017). The nature and origins of misperceptions: Understanding false and unsupported beliefs about politics. Political Psychology, 38(1), 127-150.
Hargittai, E., & Hsieh, Y. P. (2011). Succinct survey measures of web-use skills. Social Science Computer Review, 30(1), 95-107.
Inan, T., & Temur, T. (2012). Examining media literacy levels of prospective teachers. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(2), 269-285.
The phenomenon of reading an old newspaper is known: it is read with great interest until the eyes fall on the number. This suggests that the news is not particularly news; they reflect and confirm the model of the world, where only deviations from it are significant, stopping the attention of readers (Yap, Snyder & Drye 2018). News can perform different functions, reflect the world more or less objectively, or deliberately distort certain aspects of the world.
They build a positive or negative picture of the world, keep the audience’s attention on the right aspects of the world or consciously switch the audience’s attention to other aspects. Fakes appeared in a world which was well-prepared for them – advertising and propaganda, the interests of the authorities or owners: and the interests of the opposition flooded the information space. Social media made it possible to dramatically increase the number of sources, thereby virtually destroying the concept of reliability or unreliability of information. In modern media, the concept of reliability has faded into the background, although it was a top priority in traditional journalism.
Definition and Purpose of ‘Fake News’
What is ‘Fake News’?
Fake news as a phenomenon exists as much as journalism itself, but, for the first time, fake news was talked about during the election campaign in the US as a factor that could influence world events. Thousands of articles, hundreds of scientific works, and dozens of conferences are devoted to fake news. In about the same period, the term completely was devalued and acquired the meaning of any information that did not suit the speaker (Davies 2011). However, the real meaning of fake news and its impact on mass consciousness is much deeper than personal delusion.
Fake news is written and spread with the intent to harm an agent, legal entity, or person or to gain financial or political support. It is often published with sensational, exaggerated, or decidedly false headlines that attract attention. Fake news often uses bright headlines or completely fabricated news materials to increase readability, online access, and increase Internet revenue. In the latter case, fake news often has sensational headlines to increase the promotion from advertising produced regardless of the veracity of published stories (Doshi et al. 2018). Fake news is also undermining the serious coverage in the media and interferes with professional journalists.
Easy access to income from online advertising and increased politicization of social networks, primarily from Facebook News Feed, lead to the spread of fake news that is used to ensure competition. States in the confrontation are also involved in the creation and promotion of false news, especially during elections (Allcott & Gentzkow 2017). The researchers recognized the difficulty in determining what exactly applied to fake news. Some define fake news as a subgenre of disinformation, calling it information about the state of the world which is built with disregard for the facts. Fake news misinform, referring to the worst of human nature and simultaneously undermining the truth.
One of the main factors determining how reliable the news is what people have faced before; their experience allows not to believe things that have previously been rejected as false. In one study, participants were presented with a variety of real and fake news, and then they were asked to evaluate the stories accuracy. It is found that familiar fake news stories are considered more accurate than unfamiliar real news stories (Silverman & Singer-Vine 2016). The more people are exposed to fake news, the less they can recognize that it is not true.
The Causes of ‘Fake News’ Emergence
The presence of a large number of fake news is due to the existence of users who have chosen the so-called negative model of behavior on the Internet. It can be just ‘trolls’, or falsifiers — haters and ‘abusers’ or ideological racists and extremists. Fakes have become a mass phenomenon because they are attractive to a large number of users and it also means easy money.
Today’s fake news has swept everyone; it is random information set or created deliberately for a variety of reasons. For example, the news can be spread to divert from the truth, in which the perpetrators of some negative event may be interested. 23% of Americans said they had to spread such kind of lie; 14% knew it was fake and 16% found it out later (Silverman & Singer-Vine 2016). Fake news can also work to change the picture of the world as a whole, undermining its foundations in the weakest places.
For example, the US intelligence community has formulated the goals of Russian cyberattacks against the US presidential elections of 2016 in such words— “to undermine public confidence in the democratic process in America.” (Allcott & Gentzkow 2017, p. 229). As a result, Gallup showed that only 66% of Americans trust the election results (Guess, Nyhan & Reifler 2018). It is not necessary that these interventions had the greatest impact, but they were among those that were aimed at such a result.
‘Fake News’ Created by Bots
Not only people but also so-called social bots are working to create and spread untrue information. These robots produce 60% of online traffic today, which is 20% more than it was in 2015 (Tambini 2017). In this regard, three problems give rise to the active use of bots. It is the distribution of influence between multiple suspicious online accounts, the polarization of political debate, and the intensification of disinformation.
Fake news generates a fake life, and readers are forced to react to it as they were real. Elon Musk sees an even greater danger in the future when artificial intelligence will be able to generate any messages. He says, “robots can start a war by releasing fake news and press releases, faking email accounts and manipulating information. The pen is stronger than the sword.” (Davis 2010, p. 39). Another problem complicating the situation was the political division of the population.
Inside the US, supporters of the Democratic and Republican parties believe different news sources (Yap, Snyder & Drye 2018). This year, they pay more attention to the news than they did in 2017 (Tambini 2017). However, due to the dominant number of fake news, their desire to be aware of finds the wrong expression, and a huge number of people begin to speak and act as they are told by stakeholders.
Why Do Governments Need ‘Fake News’?
The analysis of cyber forces of the governments showed the following directions in their work. First, they generate positive messages that reinforce and support government positions. Israel, for example, is entering into a debate with those who are critical of the state position, for which there are even student scholarships in universities (Tambini 2017). Secondly, such forces are engaged in insulting those who express criticism of the government; political dissidents are often subjected to this attack.
Third, the messages posted may be neutral, although their purpose is to divert attention from the issues under discussion. All this reflects the generation of a huge number of fundamentally negative messages at the output. False news supports the same trend; it is negative news, which is getting more widespread for this reason.
It seems likely that negative news is more important, because readers do not believe positive stories, considering them not natural, but the result of pushing, for example, by PR services. This feeling is partly justified, according to various estimates, 70-80% of messages may be fake positive news (Tambini 2017). The negative news is retold much more than positive, which is provoked by hereditary memory. The awareness of negative information is more important for survival than knowledge of a positive one.
Detection of ‘Fake News’
How to Distinguish ‘Fakes’ and Mistakes?
One of the acute problems is a determination of the differences between a fake and a misconception, which sometimes occur during journalistic investigations. Activists in human rights are afraid that the fight against false news can turn into the limitation of liberty of speech, and this fear has every reason to be true. Officials not only in authoritarian countries are interested in journalists not mentioning their mistakes (Tambini 2017).
As well as in criminal law, arguably, the intent can be a general criterion of lies. If a journalist is truly mistaken, he or she cannot be suspected of fake news, but if it is a proven and initially conscious step aimed at influencing social perception, it is false news. Meanwhile, distributors of fake materials can be either interested participants of the conspiracy or honest people under a strong impression because of the information received. Both professionals and ordinary people are often impulsive and can initially ‘like’ or repost such information and only then weigh all the ‘pros’ and ‘cons.’
Determination of differences is also hampered by the fact that fake information is often sophisticated in its specificity. Fakes are sometimes spread to make the actual news look absurd and to compromise the opposition’s viewpoint. For example, if unwanted information appears in a public space, it can be discredited by publishing additional, clumsily crafted arguments and then by victorious exposing (Shane 2017). As a result, public trust in the original information is reduced, even if the news is completely true.
Criteria for ‘Fake News’
First of all, it is necessary to distinguish fake news used in advertising and PR and fake news as a means of political struggle and propaganda of certain views. Fake news of the first type includes ‘black PR’, intrusive advertising, unfair advertising, or banner ads to infect computers with viruses (Yap, Snyder & Drye 2018). Obsessive, hidden, and false advertising is much more common than real fake news, according to Google (Shane 2017). This side of fake news refers to the sphere of economic competition.
Fake news becomes politically significant when social networks are actively involved in the political struggle. The pre-election agenda or the foreign policy strategy of the state is spread not only through classical media resources, such as newspapers and television but also through real and fake accounts on the network (Lazer et al. 2018). Moreover, the volume and frequency of such information flow significantly exceed the capabilities of classical media.
The source of the news can play a significant role in determining its authenticity. If the source is unknown or pretends to be the popular media, as often happens, the probability of fake increases significantly. Also, untrue news often comes from engaged professionals in propaganda (Ball 2017), whose purpose is to speak on behalf of their party (political or private) and to attack opponents. Such speakers ignore the evidence of the opposite party and try to discredit each of them.
However, his criterion is not universal – it is enough to recall the war of 2003 in Iraq. Minister Mohammed al-Sahaf was talking about the victories of Iraqi troops and refuting the military successes of Americans even when their tanks entered Baghdad (Ball 2017). Later, it turned out that before the war, the world’s leading media believed in fake information about Saddam’s chemical weapons, as well as about Saddam’s ties with al-Qaeda (Kucharski 2016).
At the same time, the sources of fakes were involved persons — for example, Iraqi immigrants who wanted to overthrow Saddam with the help of the United States. Also, civil servants involved in the analysis of this information ignored the news that contradicted their version (Kucharski 2016). The consequences were dramatic, especially for the Iraqis who were victims of the war.
Causes of Believing in ‘Fakes’
The question of why society is willing to absorb fakes, often quite obvious, is fundamental to solve the problem. It may not be just the ineptitude or unwillingness to consider some different opinions — although this problem is also acute. A reader is inwardly ready to adopt doubtful material if it meets his or her ideology or everyday views on the truth (Kucharski 2016). For instance, a defender of liberal viewpoints rather like an article that raises the topic of violating human rights, while the conservative will appreciate news about insulting feelings of believers. Each of them considers the source of such information to be reliable (Kucharski 2016). Consequently, the readers unconsciously contribute to the conscious dissemination of what they object to.
Moreover, fake news would not have received its special position in journalistic discourses and textbooks on political science, if not for the destruction of the monopoly on news from traditionally proven sources, including official ones. People who are accustomed to the vertical spread of news from officials to consumers, were not ready for the opposite option when news from a private account is replicated by well-known media, often without verification (Ball 2017).
This creates the effect of suggestion, when the same lie, broadcast by different sources, is transmitted from user to user, becoming more plausible along the way. The direct belief in fake news also arises because the Internet is considered a free information space, connected neither by international nor by national censorship (Yap, Snyder & Drye 2018). These factors, which determine the freedom of communication, help users to believe and newsmakers to manipulate.
There are websites on the Internet with pranks that publish fake information. They differ from the apparent attackers in explanation of the frivolity of publications but made not too noticeable so that it is not immediately evident to the reader. The materials of these sites are actively distributed in social networks without any special incentive, but because they correspond to the views of readers.
‘Fake News’ as a Radically New Threat
Why is This Dangerous?
Comfort zone and the habit of bringing new information under the existing stereotypes work in favor of the creators of fake news. Subconsciously finding confirmation of their guesses, habits, political beliefs, people are no longer inclined to reflect on their truth (Ball 2017). At this point, their self-confidence increases, and everyone is more satisfied with the result of self-identification than doubt about it (Viner 2016).
The ‘post-truth’ effect is based on the human psyche structure (Yap, Snyder & Drye 2018). The truth does not cause the emotional response after the initial euphoria of the news, which arose in response to fake information (McNair, Bruns & Schapals 2018). On the contrary, there is an annoyance with themselves and — most importantly — with those who discovered the truth and infringed on the stability of a personal worldview.
It is difficult for people to accept the idea that their basic beliefs may be wrong. That is why the emergence of fake news is one of the main threats to human freedom and security. Most people refuse to see this problem and consider it far from themselves (McNair, Bruns & Schapals 2018). Meanwhile, in the 21st century, this weapon has brought society a lot of troubles and destructions.
Ways to Prevent ‘Fake News’
Experts suggest two main scenarios for improving this complicated situation. These are tighter control by the state, which is fraught with the abandonment of freedom of speech, and the introduction of technological solutions, for example, automatic blocking of fake news or supplying them with appropriate labels (McNair, Bruns & Schapals 2018). However, there is always a possibility that the distributors of the negative in the network go to the closed part of the Internet. At the same time, it seems that the only correct strategy for readers today is to try not to trust anonymous news. If the news has an author and the falseness of the publication is proved, the author should be treated by the current legislation.
Of course, no total censorship of the Internet and the media can be a solution. The idea of responsibility for news content has become a basic requirement for individuals and countries in a state of an information war. Usually, structures of the foreign Ministries are engaged in the fight against fake news discrediting the state (UK Parliament 2018). Also, the requirements for the regulation of fake content were presented to Facebook, Google, Twitter, and other major social networks and news platforms (Yap, Snyder & Drye 2018).
Fact-checking technologies are used to block questionable news; it is the verification of facts through additional editorial control department on the complaints of readers. Facebook has hired four companies: Snopes, Politifact, ABC News, and FactCheck.org, which manually check the accuracy of the news appearing on the feed (Viner 2016). If the content is suspicious, users will see a warning about it, asking if they want to repost.
Scientists investigating the phenomenon of fake news and ‘post-truth’ in American and British universities offer different ways to solve the problem. Their solution can be reduced to the development and provision of resources for users to produce independent verification of the facts (Ball 2017). Even in this case, they note the deep skepticism of the population about the official sources that will be contained in these resources. In general, the researchers come to a disappointing conclusion: people are not ready for a conscious and comprehensive approach to evaluating the read news, and stakeholders take advantage of it.
Conclusion
Only dealing with fake news by the legislative approach will not bring significant positive results, taking into account that there is a risk of going too far in prohibitions. People who want to know the truth should be more attentive to details and capable of critical thinking. Also, to save the media source from lies, it is very important to pay attention to the other opinions without denying the reasoning of the opposite side in advance; to debate not through warlike speeches, but dialogues, maybe sometimes emotional. This way the heat of passion is reduced and the damage caused by the popularisation of fake news gets insignificant.
Another effective way to deal with fake news is the joint efforts of all influential parties: governments, representatives of IT companies, and public and journalistic organizations. The essential stakeholder is the people themselves – the key consumer of information and the main victim. To achieve this goal, several more serious issues must be resolved, such as the provision of a high level of education, intercultural education, and the reduction of ethnic and racial tensions.
Reference List
Allcott, H & Gentzkow, M 2017, ‘Social media and fake news in the 2016 election’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 211-236.
Ball, J 2017, Post-truth: how bullshit conquered the world, Biteback Publishing, London.
Davies, N 2011, Flat earth news: an award-winning reporter exposes falsehood, distortion and propaganda in the global media, Chatto & Windus, London.
Davis, A 2010, Political communication and social theory, Routledge, London.
Doshi, A, Raghavan, S, Petitt, E & Weiss, R 2018, ‘The economics of fake news: consumer behavior during the 2016 election’, Academy of Management Global Proceedings, no. 2018, p. 61.
Guess, A, Nyhan, B & Reifler, J 2018, ‘Selective exposure to misinformation: evidence from the consumption of fake news during the 2016 US presidential campaign’, European Research Council, pp. 1-14.
Kucharski, A 2016, ‘Post-truth: study epidemiology of fake news’, Nature, vol. 540, p. 525.
Lazer, DM, Baum, MA, Benkler, Y, Berinsky, AJ, Greenhill, KM, Menczer, F, Schudson, M, Metzger, MJ, Nyhan, B, Pennycook, G, Rothschild, D, Sloman, SA, Sunstein, CR, Thorson, EA, Watts, DJ & Zittrain, JL, 2018, ‘The science of fake news’, Science, vol. 359, no. 6380, pp. 1094-1096.
McNair, B, Bruns, A & Schapals, AK 2018, ‘Fake news and democratic culture’, in Digitizing Democracy, Routledge, London, pp. 19-29.
Shane, S 2017, ‘From headline to photograph, a fake news masterpiece’, The New York Times. Web.
UK Parliament 2018, Disinformation and ‘fake news’. Web.
Viner, K 2016, ‘How technology disrupted the truth’, The Guardian. Web.
Yap, A, Snyder, LG & Drye, S 2018, ‘The information war in the digital society: a conceptual framework for a comprehensive solution to fake news’, Academy of Social Science Journal, vol. 3, no. 7, pp. 1214-1221.
The concept known as “fake news” is not necessarily a new one, as it has existed since ancient times. However, it was during the 2016 presidential election when the term has caused a considerable amount of controversy. Although some people argue that fake news is not a major problem, many claim that it is indeed a serious cause for concern because it has enough power to influence the outcome of the election. The goal of this essay is to present the arguments and viewpoints of both sides as well as an opinion on what should be done with fake news.
First, it is necessary to take a look at arguments of those who are concerned about fake news. According to Bakir and McStay (2017), the main reasons why fake news is a serious social and democratic problem are that it produces misinformed citizens, traps them in echo chambers where they stay misinformed and provokes outrage due to its affective and provocative nature. All three of these issues are likely to bring social discontent with democratic outcome and process (Bakir and McStay, 2017). Another concern with fake news is that, due to low-level of many people’s cognitive processes, familiarity through constant repetition serves to make even the most implausible claims believable despite them being tagged as contested. (Pennycook, Cannon & Rand, 2017) Thus, it is necessary to find solutions that prevent people from reading fake news in the first place, as opposed to qualifiers that merely make people discount fake news (Pennycook et al., 2017).
On the other hand, some people dismiss concerns related to fake news, instead claiming that the overarching problem is in people’s “waning trust in real reporting” (Herrman 2016). The definition of “fake news” has widened to encompass not only the fabricated stories, but also the more traditional media on Facebook and elsewhere, which threatens the traditional media’s ability to declare things as being true or not (Herrman 2016). In other words, pretty much any stories or sources, even the ones that are true, are at risk of being labeled as fake news.
Personally, I believe that fake news is one of the most serious threats to democracy, which the United States take great pride in and thus needs to be treated. Facebook has proposed a number of possible solutions, such as elevating quality of “Related Articles” on Facebook’s News Feed, putting warning labels on stories flagged as false, listening to advice from the news industry etc. (Pennycook et al. 2017). However, because most fake news is generated not with political, but financial goals in mind it might be necessary to look into digital advertising and how it could help combat fake news. Even the most disreputable advertisers are not likely to want to be associated with untrustworthy sources. As such, it would be a good idea for advertisers to start identifying fake news websites and rejecting them, thus leaving them without a source of revenue. (Pennycook et al. 2017)
In conclusion, while the 2016 presidential election did not create the idea of fake news, it brought the idea into the public eye and revealed how it can be used as means of propaganda and for financial gain. The democracy is threatened by it now more than ever. As such, there is a new need to combat fake news and misinformation. While not a perfect solution, digital advertisers may play a significant part in making fake news less profitable.
Reference List
Bakir, V., & McStay, A. (2017). Fake News and The Economy of Emotions: Problems, causes, solutions. Digital Journalism, 1-22.
Pennycook, G., Cannon, T. D., & Rand, D. G. (2017). Prior exposure increases perceived accuracy of fake news.
Herrman J. (2016). Fixation on Fake News Overshadows Waning Trust in Real Reporting. The New York Times. Web.
News coverage has been the focus of attention for many researchers in linguistics and communication studies. It is especially relevant nowadays when the expression “fake news” is drawing much attention. The issue of fake news and the following problem of trustworthiness in media continue to receive interest not only from the general public and journalists. It is also a crucial matter for politicians and the digital industry. In this report, the main emphasis will be put on analyzing the writing style of fake news, i.e., the linguistic form of text rather than its semantics.
First of all, intentionally deceptive articles, headlines, and social media posts may appear for a number of reasons. Sometimes articles are created with the purpose of influencing elections. In some cases, they might contribute to an informational war between states. Other reasons include aiming at raising or lowering someone’s reputation. Finally, writing fake news is mostly about earning revenue. The intention is for the fake news to spread without readers taking the time to verify it properly. Journalists rely on attention-grabbing language and flashy vocabulary. Moreover, it is important to remember that outbreaks of false news are often initiated by recent events. They are written and then shared on the Internet among the audience who is expected to believe them.
As with any text analysis, fake news analysis requires a cross-functional, cross-linguistic, or cross-theme study. Having a reliable method of identifying fake news is essential. The primary cause of this issue is that in terms of stylistics, fake news imitates reliable reporting. For this reason, in recent years, several researchers have been trying to develop the stylistic features of fake news. For instance, Zhou and Zafarani (2018) have discovered some stylistic aspects of misleading content.
According to them, much like when false information is investigated from a knowledge-based viewpoint, exploring a hoax from a style-based viewpoint also accentuates examining the media content (Zhou & Zafarani, 2018). Nevertheless, knowledge-based research focuses on the evaluation of the accuracy of the news, while style-based research deals with the estimation of news intention. Therefore, the main question of stylistics regarding fake news is if there is a purpose of deceiving the public or not.
While the advancement of style-based false news studies research is not fully developed, as there is a limited amount of correlated studies, the analysis of means of stylistic expression, which are used in public deception, has long been an operational field of studies. It is evident that specialists do not have an effective method of distinguishing between facts and lies yet, but there are particular style-based features that should be taken into consideration.
The researchers identify three deception style theories. They include deception style theory which elaborates on how content style can help investigate deceit. The next theory explores style-based characteristics and patterns that can identify deception. The last theory examines deception detection tactics and how style can be used to recognize fake news and other kinds of false information (Zhou & Zafarani, 2018, p. 13). Intuitively, the style of deceptive news that aims to provide false information to readers should, to some extent, deviate from the truth. It is usually filled with exaggerated expressions with the purpose of creating strong emotions.
As for style-based features, the researchers present a variety of them. Attribute-based linguistic characteristics, otherwise known as theory-based language qualities, are mainly created based on the corresponding above-mentioned deception theories. In accordance with their study, attribute-based linguistic features that characterize the content style can be classified into ten groups. They include “quantity, complexity, uncertainty, subjectivity, non-immediacy, sentiment, diversity, informality, specificity, and readability” (Zhou & Zafarani, 2018, p. 15).
While attribute-based linguistic characteristics are considered pertinent, interpretable, and expectable, they usually lack quantifying misleading content style in contradiction to structure-based characteristics. Attributed-based aspects frequently require some supplemental levels of measurement or computing. Needless to say, it can take some time, despite its importance, to appropriate feature evaluation and filter for misleading information.
Structure-based characteristics present content style on four linguistic levels. They include lexicon, syntax, semantic, and discourse (Zhou & Zafarani, 2018, p. 15). At the lexicon level, the primary purpose is to evaluate the frequency data of letters and words in a text. At the syntax level, all tasks are carried out by parts of speech that facilitate their marking and reviewing. Regarding the semantic level, such factors as Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count are commonly utilized to produce semantic classes for each semantic characteristic.
Regarding the theory of deception detection strategies, it must be noted that the main approach to style-based deceit discovery is to use a feature vector portraying the style of the fake article in an automatic learning framework to see whether the given information is misleading. In view of the fact that fake news sources commonly draw attention to a brief financial or political objective, they mostly use an informal and emotional style of narration. A headline on a front page may state one fact, but then the body of the article presents completely different information. Internet users even created a special word for this type of deceptive headline, which is clickbait. Such headlines quickly grab the attention to interest the reader in clicking the article.
While the theories above provide some insights into the stylistic nature of fake news, it is evident that a more thorough investigation is crucial for a complete understanding of the topic. Examining the content style of fake news, however, may radically differ from studying deceit in other kinds of written information. While the theories can assist in analyzing misleading records, they are not immediately oriented toward fake news. Further studies in stylistics are needed to discover and research ways to detect a lie from the truth.
The goal of this paper has been to thoroughly and attentively study the current stylistic means of distinguishing fake news from real news. In conclusion, it would appear that the trustworthiness of news articles can indeed be evaluated based on the style they are written in, though this is not a foolproof approach.
Reference
Zhou, X., & Zafarani, R. (2018). Fake news: A survey of research, detection methods, and opportunities. Web.
Fake news is flooding the modern media space; they are a significant factor in the distribution of the media and can mislead buyers on the Internet space. Phony information is stylistically designed not to arouse suspicion but is entirely or partially unreliable. It is essential to understand that fake news threatens the consumer. In today’s digital society, facts are of less value than the emotions and reactions of people caused by them. This means that the subjective emotions, assessments, reactions, and personal beliefs look more significant than the objective facts and phenomena. Under these conditions, an accurate description of products loses its actual value, but there is a lot of false information about the product attributed to fake news.
The correlation between the degree of security and the legal regulation of cyberspace remains one of the most urgent issues today. In my opinion, government authorities should have primary responsibility for managing fake news and its consequences. It is necessary to actively develop legislation regulating relations in cyberspace since fake news can threaten human health. In the best case, consumers will lose money by buying a product with these properties (such as LeanSpa products); in the worst case, consumers can seriously harm their health. For example, scientists have proved that the benefits of teas for weight loss are fake news; their consumption can lead to ulcers (Petcu, 2018). Therefore, government authorities’ control of the information space is an inevitable necessity to protect the health of citizens, which is one of the mandatory elements of the rule of law.
Fake news poses a real threat to the safety of people’s health and their lives in the long term. Therefore, it is unethical for a company to allow it to run on a controversial website and promote untested scientific data. After all, in this way, the company puts its revenue and money in general above the well-being of its customers and deceives the consumer, which is unethical.
Reference
Petcu, B. (2018). Fake news and financial markets: A 21st-century twist on market manipulation. American University Business Law Review, 7(2), 297-325.