The rise of misinformation has perhaps increased within the last four or five years. During the pandemic, we have seen an increase in the number of people who are accessing their news from unconventional or non-traditional sources. Back in 2014, Borkovich and Bree-Vitelli investigated a similar rise in what they called “blind trust, naivete, or skepticism” as a result of influences of mobile technology culture. “Young and older adults alike are willing to sacrifice trust, reliability, and credibility for short-term, efficient results when soliciting real-time online news” (Borkovich & Breese-Vitelli, 2014, p. 409).
Long gone are the days of only one, two or three sources for news. Today, with the proliferation of online platforms and sources, the possibilities are nearly limitless as to where you can access information. The glaring issue with all these sources is a lack of factual information. That doesn’t simply mean information must come from one point-of-view. Most would agree that many vantage points and opinions are beneficial to understanding most topics. The issue that is starting to take root is that there exists lots of misinformation that can’t be corroborated.
Having worked in the media for many years, I can attest to the fact that resources for conducting “real” news gathering are diminishing. Journalists used to have a code of ethics, but they also used to have the resources to do thorough reporting. Fewer reporters and technicians combined with 24-hour news cycles are throwing due diligence (and often important details) into the wind. “Online, often anonymous news sources, as online participants are willing to trade-off verification and credibility of sources to satisfy their needs for instant gratification, convenience, and rapid-response” (Borkovich & Breese-Vitelli, 2014, p. 409).
The University of California’s Berkeley Library has created a Real News / Fake News: Fact Checkers database that lists sources where one can verify news. Similar Canadian examples are: http://factscan.ca/ and https://www.thewalrus-factchecking.com/.
The importance of digital literacy is becoming increasingly important as it doesn’t appear the trend towards non-traditional “news” sources is waning. The ability to critically evaluate what you read online is an important attribute for young and old. Shifts in how we access our news and culture impact us as a society, and need to be balanced with an introspective approach to understand what these shifts mean to how we interact with the world around us.
References
Borkovich, D. J., & Breese-Vitelli, J. (2014). the influence of mobile technology culture: Blind trust, naïveté, or skepticism. Issues in Information Systems, 15(2), 399-410.
Misinformation is such an important topic when it comes to not just learning but day to day life. Having left the healthcare market where I was educating different markets (animal health, professional beauty, cannibis, life sciences etc., I was able to see first hand the impact that social media had on sharing of information over the last 2 years versus the 2003 SARS outbreak. Misinformation was a topic I wrote about for a multimedia journalism course. What struck me most was the study that looked at social media and the fact that many articles were shared without even opening and reading the article. Here’s a condensed version if you are interested in reading. I’m happy to share the references.
Spreading truth may be the cure to the Pandemic
“Scientists and journalists are working so fast and information is travelling so fast,” says Dr. Cailen O’Connor, co-author of The Misinformation Age, “that if a new study is shared before being peer-reviewed it has a greater chance of being retracted.”
COVID-19 is the first crisis where the speed of sharing information has impacted the health of many. According to O’Conner, “when it comes to misinformation, the further content spreads from the source, the less it looks like a lie.” It is in our nature to want to find an explanation and share information we feel makes the pandemic more manageable.
Don’t believe everything you see
Case in point, a 2016 study by Gabielkov et al published in ACM, found that sixty percent of the links found on social media are shared without even opening the link to read, review or question the validity of the content. Combine this with the speed of which science is being published or shared via pre-print servers in an effort to provide evidence to support policy and public health measures we have the perfect storm for sharing inaccurate and improperly validated data.
Fighting Fake News
A more recent study by Talwar et al in the Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services looked at the impact of sharing fake news on social media platforms and concluded, “a users’ social stature and reputation in online social groups can improve significantly if they establish their identities as those who take corrective action against the circulation of fake news.”
Cramming doesn’t support knowledge acquisition
The pandemic has been a crash course for expanding our knowledge of infection control. The inability to differentiate between misinformation, disinformation or the truth can be difficult, even for experts. It is in our nature to want to find a cure, a solution, or an explanation to make the fact the pandemic is a marathon and not a sprint more palatable and manageable. The next time you decide to ‘like’ or ‘share’ a story you come across that seems to provide a solution, take the time read or authenticate before you share. You have the choice of gratifying your social needs and being part of the problem or becoming part of the solution to stopping the spread of fake news.
Misinformation is such an important topic when it comes to not just learning but day to day life. Having left the healthcare market where I was educating different markets (animal health, professional beauty, cannibis, life sciences etc., I was able to see first hand the impact that social media had on sharing of information over the last 2 years versus the 2003 SARS outbreak. Misinformation was a topic I wrote about for a multimedia journalism course. What struck me most was the study that looked at social media and the fact that many articles were shared without even opening and reading the article. Here’s a condensed version if you are interested in reading. I’m happy to share the references.
Spreading truth may be the cure to the Pandemic
“Scientists and journalists are working so fast and information is travelling so fast,” says Dr. Cailen O’Connor, co-author of The Misinformation Age, “that if a new study is shared before being peer-reviewed it has a greater chance of being retracted.”
COVID-19 is the first crisis where the speed of sharing information has impacted the health of many. According to O’Conner, “when it comes to misinformation, the further content spreads from the source, the less it looks like a lie.” It is in our nature to want to find an explanation and share information we feel makes the pandemic more manageable.
Don’t believe everything you see
Case in point, a 2016 study by Gabielkov et al published in ACM, found that sixty percent of the links found on social media are shared without even opening the link to read, review or question the validity of the content. Combine this with the speed of which science is being published or shared via pre-print servers in an effort to provide evidence to support policy and public health measures we have the perfect storm for sharing inaccurate and improperly validated data.
Fighting Fake News
A more recent study by Talwar et al in the Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services looked at the impact of sharing fake news on social media platforms and concluded, “a users’ social stature and reputation in online social groups can improve significantly if they establish their identities as those who take corrective action against the circulation of fake news.”
Cramming doesn’t support knowledge acquisition
The pandemic has been a crash course for expanding our knowledge of infection control. The inability to differentiate between misinformation, disinformation or the truth can be difficult, even for experts. It is in our nature to want to find a cure, a solution, or an explanation to make the fact the pandemic is a marathon and not a sprint more palatable and manageable. The next time you decide to ‘like’ or ‘share’ a story you come across that seems to provide a solution, take the time read or authenticate before you share. You have the choice of gratifying your social needs and being part of the problem or becoming part of the solution to stopping the spread of fake news.
Hi Nicole,
Thank you for the detailed feedback; I enjoyed reading this.
One question crossed my mind as I was reading your response, will we ever be able to clearly differentiate between misinformation, disinformation or the truth? It almost appears to be an impossible task, even if you’re a subject matter expert on a particular topic. The volume and speed of information is so significant that its sometimes overwhelming.
Look forward to reading your feedback,
Saeid
Thanks for your feedback Sheena. I didn’t bring up the concept of news aggregators that thrive with “click bait”, and have little oversight as the algorithms do much of the curation.
It is challenging to not look at current trends and the overall online landscape with cynicism. For platforms and technologies that have such promise, their darker sides often creep into view.
This excellent article highlights the drawbacks of our modern Wild West IE. the Internet which is now so embedded in daily life. The authors cite the importance of digital literacy as an essential part of media use. Digital literacy, pros and cons must be integrated into education today from kindergarten to university and beyond.
What is interesting is that unlike the rise of social media sites and blogs, there are actually not a lot of fact checking programs for verification, which also creates the question of what is the intended strategy? Thus, with so few limitations and quality controls, the new Wild West remains an open border-less arena where accountability is secondary to disinformation and fake news. Politically, financially and psychologically, coupled with decreased critical thinking and evaluation skills/ knowledge, it has never been so easy to sow religious mania, disrupt governance in all areas of the globe ( think of Washington DC in Jan 2021) or religious fanatic wars where thousands become refugees overnight while the practice of misinformation continues, unparalleled.
In addressing the role and perhaps plight of journalists today, it is necessary to also state that reporting news may be slanted according to media giants who are stakeholders with important financial investments. In what is deemed politically correct or otherwise, irrespective of what is true or false, where in itself, skepticism of journalistic reports, ( unless as live camera coverage and people are killed or fleeing for their live) grows while critical thinking which should occur at that moment does not.
During the last decade, many media giants have been exposed, undermined or taken over ( for varying reasons) which effectively acts to influence popular opinion, creating further distrust of legitimate reporting and fueling the consumption of fake news.
The information age as many refer to this century, should denote new knowledge and how to source it correctly and manage it responsibly. . While the oft repeated mantra that robots will take over our lives in the future, and certainly,have already shown their ability in manufacturing lifeless objects, it is questionable as to why a human ( the inventor/ creator of a robot) would be so willing to acknowledge their own limitations while granting greater power to a lifeless, energy dependent machination. Why have people forgotten how to think ?