The widespread use and dissemination of digital media is something that now goes by unquestioned in most aspects of our everyday life. Twenty years ago it would have been unheard of to carry a telephone around in your pocket, let alone allowing that phone to manage large parts of your daily routine. Putting aside for another time the complex task of unpacking what we mean when we use the term “digital media” for the sake of this blog post I generally use it to mean any virtual phenomena enabled through the use of a technological medium (AKA social media is accessed through the medium of your phone or computer).

Every profession in every industry has felt the ripple effects from the digital revolution, but none more so than the occupation of journalism. The internet and social media have irreversibly changed the way in which we, as a species, exchange and transmit information. Because of these social platforms, we are able to hear about news stories as they happen in real time; often from hundreds (if not thousands) of miles away. However, as we witnessed with the rise of Donald Trump or the polarizing issue surrounding Brexit this instantaneous information transference can, and is, being used against us. Where historically stories would be fact-checked before leaving newsroom floors now social media bypasses many of the safeguards which would normally catch journalistic error; intentional or otherwise.

The problem, at its core, is that a false story can be intentionally distributed and the basic truths lost; overwhelmed by the grander, sensationalist view. British tabloids give us a great example of this happening back in 2016. An article written by Andrew Chadwick (of Loughborough University), Cristian Vaccari (also of Loughborough University) and Ben O’Loughlin (of Royal Holloway) explain how images of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn were cropped and edited to seemingly show him ‘dancing’ while on his way to a Remembrance Day service. Attached was a story with the headline “Is this really the day to audition for Strictly [Come Dancing], Jeremy? Corbyn appears to dance a jig at the Cenotaph as he waits for the Remembrance Day parade.” This story gained almost instant virality online with many social media users condemning his tactlessness. It did eventually come to light that the images were doctored and the story falsified however this piece of barely disguised propaganda illustrates how the general public is easily convinced of ‘alternative facts’ by those wanting to abuse public opinion.

What then is the solution? How can we cure a viral post, so to speak? Well, just as in life there is no one easy answer. As a member of the general public, the best way to arm yourself against the spread of misinformation is to understand how and why it happens. What news organization is publishing the story? Is it a public broadcaster or a for-profit business? Why did they choose the headline that they did? What information could they possibly be omitting from their coverage and why did they choose to leave it out? All of these questions will allow you to gain a more well-rounded idea of how news is produced and for what purpose it serves in the wider world.

It is my belief that as people begin to understand these nuances of news media they become less likely to blindly accept something as truth; wanting to first verify it with more sources. Once a misleading or fictitious article is out in the world there isn’t a lot anyone can really do however I predict that by supplying the general public with this metaphorical journalistic toolkit, one that encourages a critical analysis (even in a superficial or baseline way), this will eventually lead to a decrease in the spread of inflammatory stories.
Well… One can only hope.

References:
Chadwick, A., Vaccari, C. and O’Loughlin, B. (2018). Do tabloids poison the well of social media? Explaining democratically dysfunctional news sharing. New Media & Society, 20(11), pp.4255-4274.