“There has been an information overload and a general lack of understanding about how the internet works by people has also contributed to a great extent to an increase in fake news”
FAKE news, defined as misleading information presented as news, has been recently unrestrained, aided by social media, in all sectors of society, raising an enormous challenge to editors as gatekeepers.
Industry observers have noted there’s nothing new about fake news, a buzzword that often has the aim of damaging the reputation of a person or entity, or making money through advertising revenue.
They add for as long as there has been news, there has been misinformation, both deliberate and unintentional.
One particular highlight (or lowlight) of fake news was round the turn of the 20th century when yellow journalism, a term coined in 1895 to describe journalism that put sales over factual reporting, helped push the United States into war with Spain.
But while there has always been disinformation and poor-quality journalism, things seem to have gotten much worse in the age of social media.
In fact, a recent study by the Pew Research Center found that Americans see fake news and information as a bigger problem than racism, illegal immigration and terrorism.
In the Philippines, observers are knocked for six on the spread of fake news which can at times be easily endorsed, if believed, by people who see the fake news as parallel to their cold-blooded opinions.
But some industry observers ask why fake news is such a big issue? If so many people agree that it’s a problem, why do they read, share and promote it?
Other observers who have been on the scene for much longer say the reason is because fake news is deceptive not just in its content but in the way it plays on our biases and our predispositions.
This is where academics are needed to help mold aspiring journalists, particularly in this digital age, to be advocates of truth, and for senior practitioners to have a reasonably keen eye to separate the chaff from the grain for supposedly seasoned masters as gatekeepers.
Beyond doubt, we need good editors to serve as mentors, and, with the assistance of the reviewers, they provide beat reporters and editorial assistants writing feature materials with guidance on what needs to be done to make a paper publishable or make the end-product digitally marketable.
It is not enough that we have good and tech-savvy staff who could help deceive the market with likes and shares and whatever else.
There is a need for content quality.
Because at the end of the day, even if a news organization had accumulated exceedingly high numbers for likes and followers and therefore a good invitation for an advertising purse, the content quality will make the last gasp or desperate rescue attempt stance.
Editors are there to ensure the published material is legitimate and factual, accurate, balanced and comprehensive.
Also, habituated gatekeepers can help ensure the rejigged end-product is valid, factual and legitimate.
Some media content analysts have asked: “How did we get here and where have all the credible and sober news gatekeepers gone?”
Before all else, many have been overwhelmed by the surging idea of fake news without really being able to see the lean meat, as it were, from the tasteless, too-too hide.
Six years ago, in 2017, accusations and counter-claims of “fake news” flared up almost daily by politicians at the media, by bloggers at fellow bloggers, or by people at bloggers, or by media against each other.
With the onslaught of online media, particularly what have been dished out as social media feeds, things read have been given the go-ahead in appearance to be true.
But, more often than not, that is not correct. Neither true.
Fake news, or hoax news, which has existed since ages back recently got to the social media platforms and traditional media columns and air time.
Filipinos, including but not limited to politicians, hit the cue and joined in the overloaded discussion.
One expert in this category is Forrest Stroud, an experienced professional and meticulous editor covering technology, business software and website design, who hit the head of fake news as that which refers “to false information or propaganda published under the guise of being authentic news.”
He adds: “Fake news websites and channels push their fake news content in an attempt to mislead consumers of the content and spread misinformation via social networks and word of mouth.”
But one may ask: What is news really?
And many suggesting going beyond the hackneyed “when a dog bites a man that is not news, but when a man bites a dog that is news.”
For what that means really is: something must – and this is not excluding other substantive chunks – be a new information about recent or even buried developments, new and correct information about specific and timely events.
Correct in that it does not attempt to mislead but merely provides informative and educational material.
This means news presented must have the quality of being sufficiently interesting, synonymous to newsworthy, to be reported in news bulletins.
In the eyes of newsroom seniors, something is newsworthy if material can generate as much revenue, how many people will be affected, did the event reported happen very recently, is there significant new information previously unknown, was the even nearby geographically, was the event highly unusual, does it make for an entertaining story, or is anyone prominent involved?
News items and journalism, according to old industry hands, can be divided in different ways although there are patently gray areas, with distinctions including between hard news and soft news, breaking news, news analysis, and enterprise or investigative reporting.
Many say news coverage traditionally begins with the five Ws – who, what, where, when, why – and, one academic adds, the 6th W or the whence – and the one H – how – with the academic adding another H, the hence.
In democracies, news organizations in print and broadcast are often expected to shoot for objectivity in that reporters cover both sides in a controversy and try to eliminate bias.
Some note government interests, as in news agencies run by the government – like the Philippine News Agency (the first word used to have an S), Bernama of Malaysia, Antara of Indonesia, Xinhua of China, among others – where anti-government statements, photographs and insinuations are not allowed.
Observers are not saying these agencies are throwing fake news. That is not so.
Time was when news gatherers got their news from trusted sources and that journalists and media outlets were required to follow strict codes of conduct and practice.
But the internet has allowed a whole new way to publish, share and consume information and news with hardly any regulation or editorial standards.
Observers note that many people now get news from social media sites and networks and almost always it has become hard to tell whether the stories are credible or not.
There has been an information overload and a general lack of understanding about how the internet works by people has also contributed to a great extent to an increase in fake news or hoax stories.
An expert in digital media, Liverpool-based Simeon Yates, has put it aptly that the economics of social media “favor gossip, novelty, speed and ‘shareability.’”
With the internet and social media making it very easy for anyone to publish content on a website, blog or social media profile, industry observers raise the requisite for heavy-duty and erudite gatekeepers who have minds and eyes that can spot fake news and reduce them to a newsroom halt.
Sad. And disturbing.