The term ‘fake news’ has been propagated in the media a lot lately and has generated a lot of discussion and disagreement over what falls under that description. Arguments on the matter often cite differences between satirical news articles from outlets such as The Onion or The Babylon Bee and articles created by online outlets that are not satirical in nature but do exhibit some of the same qualities, including exaggeration, fabrication, and outright lies. What complicates the definition of the term ‘fake news’ is that while it is often disseminated by lesser known or less reputable outlets, mainstream outlets like ABC, NBC, Fox News, MSNBC, and CBS are not immune to publishing ‘fake news’ either. Adding verifiable news story lines that contain falsehoods to the definition of ‘fake news’, a term that traditionally applied to parody or satire, groups two things together that may be similar but are not exactly alike. To get a more accurate and nuanced definition of 'fake news' in the context of journalism and to explore how it can be recognized and averted, it helps to look at the term's predecessor: ‘yellow journalism’.
'Yellow journalism' is a well-known concept in the study of propaganda and media bias, but it is not often heard elsewhere. It is defined as a type of sensationalist reporting or news writing that is speculative with little to no credible sources. It is an unethical type of press coverage in which a legitimate news story may be littered with half-truths or painted with headlines that needlessly scaremonger and distort the truth. This definition describes the phenomenon of ‘fake news’ as applied to journalism so well that both terms, 'yellow journalism'and 'fake news’, could be used interchangeably. The only thing that has changed from the turn of the 20th century--the period in which the term 'yellow journalism' arose-- is the medium in which this type of news is published. In that period, it was newspaper content that would sometimes exhibit these negative characteristics. With the decline of newspapers and the rise of internet media in modern times, this type of 'yellow journalism' or 'fake news' has become ubiquitous to a stunning degree. However, there are some writers pushing back on how the term ‘fake news’ is being used. In an article entitled “The Fake News Scare Is, Itself, Fake News”, Jordan Shapiro muses that “we should define fake news as the process of intentionally producing false stories for rhetorical reasons, in order to persuade people to shift perspectives” (Shapiro).
‘Fake news’ is especially prevalent among online news articles from various outlets as they try to generate more website traffic. Every news outlet is guilty of this in some fashion; some more guilty than others. This is particularly noticeable with headlines that are created to grab attention but will often point to a different narrative than what is printed in an article. Sometimes these online articles will come with ridiculous or unflattering photos that will expose a media organization’s political bent. What has been termed ‘fake news’ is a concrete example of ‘yellow journalism’; it is “an amalgamation of useful little white lies strung together to impact…reality” (Shapiro). It’s also easy to spot if it is coming from publications like the National Enquirer or newsy places like the Daily Mail (nicknamed the “Daily Fail” by some readers), but it’s much harder to detect when it comes from websites that have a reputation of being “Fair and Balanced” (Fox) and because of that reputation proudly use a slogan that states, “This are Who We Are” (MSNBC). In a recent example of a major media outlet spreading ‘fake news’, CNN was forced to retract a story after it was revealed that statements by former FBI director, James Comey, refuted CNN’s news story which indicated that his testimony would contradict President Trump’s claim that he wasn’t the target of any investigation. The retraction reads, “This article was published before Comey released his prepared opening statement. The article and headline have been corrected to reflect that Comey does not directly dispute that Trump was told multiple times he was not under investigation in his prepared testimony released after this story was published” (Borger et al.). Retracting a false story is the right thing to do, but there were many more to read the ‘fake news’ that played into a false and damaging narrative than there were to read the retraction, as is often the case.
The democratization of news created more opportunities for people to present different perspectives, but it also eliminated a monopoly on which agencies spread false information. Now, anybody in the world can be a newscaster, publicist, or blogger. Whatever words one uses to define ‘yellow journalism’, whether it be ‘fake news’, ‘misinformation’, ‘hoaxes’, ‘myths', ‘misrepresentations’ or even ‘cock-and-bull stories’, it describes news that has some elements of truth—mixed with information that is false, giving it an appearance of legitimacy. Because this phenomenon has become so far-reaching due to the advent of the World Wide Web, discerning between truth and fiction seems next to impossible. However, there are suggestions coming from a variety of sources on how to recognize false stories; the advice ranges from imploring others to think critically and to not believe everything they read on the internet to those pushing for entities like Facebook or Twitter to restrict or ban certain websites. Jamie Condliffe, News and Commentary Editor for the MIT Technology Review, opines that “as long as it remains so cheap to shape public perception using fake content” the battle over ‘fake news’ will continue (Condliffe). The problem with banning websites or making the tools used to create ‘fake-news' more expensive is these are actions that one would expect from a tyrannical state, not from participating members of a free society.
The better way to recognize and combat ‘yellow journalism’, ‘fake news’, and similar distortions of the truth has always been education. A critical mind is much harder to deceive. Paternalism is not the solution to a ‘fake news’ epidemic and curtailing liberties is not a key to searching for truth. That said, there are plenty of ways to combat false information without turning the place we live in to a totalitarian state. The internet, being a wealth of information, can also be used for good with respect to educating the masses; it’s not hard to learn about logical fallacies on the go by using Google and a cell phone. Truthfully, what drives people to gravitate towards over-the-top news pieces that are false is that “we love to hear things that confirm what we think and what we feel and what we already believe” and “it makes us feel good to get information that aligns with what we already believe or what we want to hear” (Silverman 2016). Creating awareness of that tendency within ourselves will foster a healthy skepticism and a desire to search for truth, even when that truth may be unpleasant. Americans will continue to argue over the definition of ‘fake news'--argument in our society is nothing new--but we also must “start thinking about how we integrate more media literacy and critical thinking education so that people can make better judgments for themselves.” (Silverman 2016). That is what will have the greatest impact, after all, even ‘fake news’ is nothing new as we have tackled it before when it was called ‘yellow journalism’.
Works Cited
Borger, Gloria, et al. “Comey Unlikely to Judge on Obstruction.” CNN, www.cnn.com/2017/06/06/politics/comey-testimony-refute-trump-russian-investigation/index.html?sr=twCNN060717comey-testimony-refute-trump-russian-investigation1017AMVODtopPhoto&linkId=38439096. Accessed 14 June 2017.
Condliffe, Jamie. “Fake News Is Unbelievably Cheap to Produce.” MIT Technology Review, 14 June 2017, www.technologyreview.com/s/608105/fake-news-is-unbelievably-cheap/. Accessed 14 June 2017.
“Fake News Expert on How False Stories Spread and Why People Believe Them.” Fresh Airfrom NPR, 14 Dec. 2016, www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them. Accessed 14 June 2017.
Shapiro, Jordan. “The Fake News Scare Is, Itself, Fake News.” Forbes, 26 Dec. 2016, www.forbes.com/sites/jordanshapiro/2016/12/26/the-fake-news-scare-is-itself-fake-news/#47a6dac24540. Accessed 14 June 2017.
