Feature

If someone asked you to define fake news, how would you answer? Webwise

I consider fake news to be the next logical step after yellow journalism to divide, conquer, and create tribalized groups. These groups become loyal to their news sources and the idols those news sources, on both sides of the political aisle, create and promote. Wikipedia

The roots of these tactics, and the term yellow journalism, date back more than a hundred years to the newspaper circulation war between Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst. Pulitzer was a Hungarian immigrant, fluent in 4 languages, and a Union Army Veteran of the American Civil War, who worked his way up in the newspaper industry to become the owner of the New York World in 1883. William Randolph Hearst was handed his first editorial job at a newspaper by his wealthy father. Yellow Journalism Blog

Pulitzer created a journalistic style that appealed to the average person with simple words and phrases and dramatic headlines; this was looked down upon by his contemporaries. He believed news was important for everyone and, as if to prove it, people flocked to newsstands for his sensationalized headlines. Hearst initially worked for, revered, then mimicked Pulitzer’s style. Hearst’s father first gave him editorial control of The San Francisco Examiner, then, after circulation skyrocketed, he purchased the New York Journal to compete directly with Pulitzer.

Although, that doesn’t really explain where the term yellow journalism comes from. That tangent has a quaint start. Pulitzer ran a comic strip that became popular in his newspaper. It featured a child dressed in yellow. After Hearst purchased the New York Journal, he poached the cartoonist that created the yellow kid. An editor of another New York paper began referring to Pulitzer and Hearst’s tactics as yellow journalism sometime after that. Wikipedia

But the term has much more significance than stealing an employee.

In 1895, a revolt broke out in Cuba that became the Cuban War of Independence. Hearst and Pulitzer sensationalized stories and even created outright lies to provoke the interest of the general public in becoming involved in this war for independence. While the sinking of the USS Maine in Havana Harbor is generally considered to be the final straw that pushed America into this war between two foreign countries, there were many events politicized by Hearst and Pulitzer in the years between 1895 and 1898 which created a fervor for Americans to become involved in the war. Sound familiar? The Spanish American War Centennial Website

In the ensuing hundred and twenty-one years and countless technological advancements since the Spanish-American War, social media and the internet at large have bred a general distrust of the mainstream news media and further polarized our politics. Beyond that, they’ve created such a high baseline of general noise that it’s become nearly impossible to separate the media spin from the outright fabrications of fake news outlets.

To understand spin versus fake news, let’s say the US Department of Defense releases a report stating that 80 percent of all drones successfully hit their targets. A right-wing news agency might tout the efficiency and accuracy of American engineered weapons with the headline, “US Drones Have Near Perfect Record.” Whereas, a left-wing media outlet might use the headline, “Nearly a quarter of all US drones may kill unintended targets.” Both headlines are technically correct.

Or, consider the fact that I used spin at the beginning of the story to paint Pulitzer as a hard-working immigrant turned civil war veteran and Hearst as a spoiled rich kid.

But I want to make an important distinction between spin and fake news. Spin is massaging words to fit an agenda. Real new stories will be picked up and vetted by mainstream news media from both sides. Each will present differing views, but the basic facts will remain unchanged. Fake news takes tiny grains of truth or even rumors to build a following around its agenda. It’s important when consuming news to look past the headlines, read the articles, think critically about what’s being presented, and verify the sources.

One article I read recently claimed that cases of unaccompanied children crossing the southern border rose dramatically during the second half of the Obama presidency and stated explicitly that federal and state agencies were paying for these children to be trafficked. Doing my due diligence, I followed a link to a source article on the LA Times and found a retraction, at the bottom of the article, which contradicted the headline the fake news site was basing their opinion on. That retraction should have been at the top, not the bottom. Shame on you, Los Angeles Times. LA Times

When mainstream media makes a mistake, other MSM outlets will pounce on these flaws. Look at the 2000 election. CNN called Al Gore the winner then retracted that statement and called George W. Bush the winner, then retracted that because Florida wasn’t done counting votes. More recently, a Fox News graphic stated that President Trump was withdrawing funding from 3 Mexican countries. Mistakes and spin happen but aren’t malicious; fake news is malicious. Washington Post | Snopes

So, what can be done about fake news? There are many initiatives using artificial intelligence, machine learning, human moderators, and fact checking organizations. When it comes down to a machine deciding what’s real versus what’s fake, how can a programmer decide the criteria? Is it how repeated the story is? Claims were made during the 2016 presidential election that Hillary Clinton sold 20% of the US’s Uranium to the Russians in exchange for contributions to the Clinton Foundation. The claims were continued by President Trump well into his Presidency. But the claims were false. So, repeatability isn’t a metric. How can artificial intelligence or machine learning fix this? Snopes

It can’t. What it really comes down to is you, the consumer, doing your part to identify what’s real. Don’t form beliefs based on your news consumption, form opinions. Beliefs are forged to be unchangeable. Opinions are malleable to changing circumstances. Technology Review | TechCrunch | The Telegraph

Alright, let’s wrap up this episode with some good news.