The impact of fake news on media consumption
Nothing spreads faster than wildfire and fake news, and the online environment of the 21st century display content on the basis of preferences and likes. Any individual with internet access has the privilege to publish anything he/she pleases with the garb of anonymity safeguarding them against charges. The online reputation of an organization has deep impacts on its growth, success and failures. This essay aims to examine the impact of fake news on media consumption, the legal steps taken by different countries to combat fake news and reveals the loopholes of suppressing fake news. The paper concludes with some suggestions for combating fake news, analyzing whether a self-regulatory model is effective in combating fake news while preserving freedom of expression.
Fake news reach about 60% of the total population of Singapore. The internet’s ability to broadcast info to the mass is as old as media and ‘fake news’ as a topic is growing exponentially over the last two years. It is rising as a topic of prime debate, late night talk shows and campaigns ever since presidential election of 2016 (Balmas, 2014). The producers and propagators of fake news can effectively disguise their efforts under the garb of legitimacy. Their ability to distribute the fake content widely to a broad range of audiences with the help of social media. A study suggests that about 45% of the total fake news is generated and distributed by social media (Shu et al., 2017). While the perpetuation of fake news among consumers continues to proliferate, it has substantial impacts on digital marketers and how they buy advertising apart from engaging in corporate communications with media. Brands have justifiable reasons for being concerned about the authenticity of their sponsored content, since some press releases are channelizing into news sites that are fake which will inevitably risk their brand reputation (Tambini., 2017). Owing to this, the media outlets have a lot to work on for retaining their credibility. The journalists opine that social networks are required to take responsibility for the identification and blocking of fake news. They further acknowledge the role of media in lacking credibility as variables like inadequate staff for reporting mistakes, fact-checking and publishing exaggerations extend the propagation of fake news. Identifying the different types of fake news is highly relevant in the context of the study. There are as many as ten different categories of fake news according to EAVI. The European Association for Viewers Interest surveyed the different types and their impacts on media consumption. The results along with the corresponding type of fake news were as follows: sponsored content used by advertising to give it an editorial look, propagandas adopted by corporations, government and non-profits for managing knowledge, attitudes and values (Mihailidis & Viotty.,2017) . Click baits used as sensational, eye-catching headlines designed tactfully for distraction, conspiracy theories that tries to simplify complex realities as a response to ambiguity and fear, misinformation including a blend of fact and fiction, which falsifies the original content, misinformation, may also propagate through misleading headlines and false attributions. Other impacts include emotional appeal to mass by the use of corporate and government adopted propaganda, this can either be harmful or beneficial for the mass. Established organizations often make error in news publication which hurts the brand reputation and may result in litigation. Further, satire and hoax circulated by social commentaries on networking websites might embarrass the gullible audience who might confuse the sarcastic content as true. Networ king sites like Facebook and Twitter serve as gateways to the websites of fake news. Fact-checking is one of the most noticeable and journalistic retort to fake news or any other kind of false information, it has been attracting a growing number of audience in the recent years. Although this response suffers from certain drawbacks since it is not always possible to verify authenticity and credibility of the facts.
Legal response against fake news
The digital era has enabled fake news to span in a gamut of categories, with diverse yet coinciding motivations: subversive, financial, entertainment and political. Since fake news have becomes an issue of national security, the initiation of legal actions against it becomes indispensable. The undertaken actions can be both legislative and non-legislative. Some technology company are held accountable for propagating fake news (Klein & Wueller., 2017). The government can impose a fine on such organizations if they fail to remove illegal and offensive content. Several technology companies have been increasing their efforts to counter fake news. For instance, Facebook has employed about 1,000 workers to the review teams of global ads besides their efforts in enhancing machines and removing fake accounts. Twitter has increased the accuracy of algorithmic tools for combating disinformation. The US government have also obliged RT to be registered with the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (Haciyakupoglu et al., 2018). France is drafting two debatable laws aimed to provide guidance against manipulation information at electoral period. The legislation allows a political party or a candidate to request the courts for ordering an urgent halt to the publication of info that is deemed as false. Brazil has drafted 14 laws concerning disinformation and one of these grafts have been passed over to higher authorities, demanding jail sentences as penalty for diffusion of false information relating to security, national economy and health or any other issue of public interest (Verstraete, Bambauer, & Bambauer., 2017).
Advantages
The Singapore government frames the subject of fake news as one of security and that of vulnerability. It is considered a threat to national security and one of the primary sources of cyber terrorism. Disinformation can disrupt the economic welfare, destroy lives and damage the collective identity of the nation. A convenient excuse that obscures all kind of sins is national security. It must be noted that Singapore is an island country that has traditionally been a state of single-party for decades and has a wide variety of legislations that restricts public discourse and free expression. Lacking in transparency and fearing that all the media sources are filtered by the powerful authority, a society enables fake news to thrive. Although disinformation is a problem that requires effective tackling, the responses must be balanced carefully so it doesn’t curb freedom of expression and the steps cannot be hastily undertaken.
The existing laws sues bloggers for defamations, takes down facebook posts that triggers contempt and controversy of court proceedings. Warnings may be issued against journalists sometimes for no justifiable rhyme and reason and there are laws that charges any individual who ‘wounds’ religious sentiments. Recent years have further witnessed and increased suppression of civil space and dissent. Activists had to suffer property seizure and home-raiding without a warrant and several activists of human rights have been charged for vandalism for merely posting paper sheets on subway cars. The actions taken by the government for the suppression of fake news is silencing the voice of the crowd and dissipating challenges to authority. The irony of the circumstance is that these efforts of outlawing fake news is doing more to build an environment suitable for unsubstantiated conspiracy theories and disinformation (McCright, & Dunlap, 2017).
Argument for and against the suppression of fake news
The desire to launch an attack on the truth of the opposing party is one of the driving forces behind the initiation of fake news. Search engines are responsible for the promotion and distribution of fake news and quite often the information is not transparent. The practice of using total clicks as delegation of relevance and the links as that of quality should be reevaluated for employing signals verifying accuracy and truthfulness (Batchelor.,2017). Algorithms can be improved for addressing the associated problems with fake news. Some articles should be whitelisted by content distributors for ensuring that no news make rounds with any lies attached to it. The aims of platforms and journalists are fundamentally different. While journalists aim to present the harsh reality with uncomfortable truths, platforms aim to provide entertaining information for keeping the users entertained and happy. The new digital distributors of content can filter the fake material that platforms resort to for appealing to a wider range of audience (Syed., 2017). Although self-regulatory models are not too effective in blocking the sources of fake news, they can be used to prevent the circulation of the same. Awareness of current affairs, checking the content with other people, verifying the credibility of the news with other sources are ways in which self-regulatory models help to combat the proliferation of fake news.
Conclusion
The discussion in the paper reveals the role of media in the perpetuity of fake news and identifies the impacts of these fake news on the online reputation of organizations. Fake news have unfavorable impacts on the individuals lives of human beings in the sense that they are fed with false information and are made more gullible. The legal steps undertaken by different countries for preventing the spread of fake news might impose certain challenges on the freedom of expression. Although it becomes necessary for some severe cases where national security and human rights are concerned. The suppression of fake news has similar loopholes as not only does it limit the freedom of individuals but in some extreme cases can also violate their human rights
References:
Bakir, V., & McStay, A. (2018). Fake news and the economy of emotions: Problems, causes, solutions. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 154-175
Balmas, M. (2014). When fake news becomes real: Combined exposure to multiple news sources and political attitudes of inefficacy, alienation, and cynicism. Communication Research, 41(3), 430-454.
Batchelor, O. (2017). Getting out the truth: the role of libraries in the fight against fake news. Reference Services Review, 45(2), 143-148.
Haciyakupoglu, G., Hui, J. Y., Suguna, V. S., Leong, D., & Rahman, M. F. B. A. (2018). Countering Fake News: A Survey of Recent Global Initiatives.
Klein, D., & Wueller, J. (2017). Fake news: A legal perspective.
Mihailidis, P., & Viotty, S. (2017). Spreadable spectacle in digital culture: Civic expression, fake news, and the role of media literacies in “post-fact” society. American Behavioral Scientist, 61(4), 441-454.
Shao, C., Ciampaglia, G. L., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2016, April). Hoaxy: A platform for tracking online misinformation. In Proceedings of the 25th international conference companion on world wide web (pp. 745-750). International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee.
Shu, K., Sliva, A., Wang, S., Tang, J., & Liu, H. (2017). Fake news detection on social media: A data mining perspective. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, 19(1), 22-36.
Tambini, D. (2017). Fake news: public policy responses.
Verstraete, M., Bambauer, D. E., & Bambauer, J. R. (2017). Identifying and countering fake news.
McCright, A. M., & Dunlap, R. E. (2017). Combatting misinformation requires recognizing its types and the factors that facilitate its spread and resonance. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(4), 389-396.
Syed, N. (2017). Real Talk About Fake News: Towards a Better Theory for Platform Governance. Yale LJF, 127, 337.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
