Colonel Potter dies again, on the internet
Actor Harry Morgan, who was probably best known for his role as Colonel Sherman Potter in the popular TV series MASH, has died.
In 2011.
But for some bizarre reason, many people seem to have missed this. I don’t know, maybe they were washing their hair. It is important, after all.
But Colonel Potter’s death lives on, on the internet.
Maybe you saw the story pop up in your Facebook feed last weekend? Or you saw a tweet from a friend?
The report of Morgan’s death was published by ABC News (where I work) — MASH’s ‘Colonel Potter’ dies aged 96 — in December 2011.
But over the weekend, this exact story starting appearing in our “Most Popular” lists, which you can find at the bottom of our home page.
These lists are not curated or edited in any way. They’re automated and based on how many people have clicked on a story.
So, if only a few people clicked on this old story, it pretty much wouldn’t rate in these lists at all. Because obviously most people are looking at stories from that day or the night before.
But Morgan’s obit didn’t just appear in the Most Popular list for Sunday — it appeared in the Most Popular list for the week and the month.
WTAF, as the kids say.
Now, often when this happens we suspect Reddit, the home of all good viral things. So on Sunday, I had a bit of a look around Reddit. Couldn’t see Colonel Potter there.
I popped over to Facebook to investigate*. (*By investigate, I mean do a very basic search to satisfy a simple theory.) And, as far as I could tell, people seemed to be just re-posting the original link to the ABC News story and adding their own tribute to the man they “grew up watching” or #RIP2016.
Like I said, WTAF?
In short, this is essentially how fake news works. People read a headline and no further. They don’t consult widely. They don’t look at dates, they don’t dig deeper. They have an emotion, and they react.
Obviously, Harry Morgan’s death is not fake news. It did happen… it was just five years ago.
Our analytics ended up showing that 90 per cent of clicks on the story came via Facebook.
That so many people seem to have not noticed that crucial date — which we don’t hide, mind you— is just very strange. But it gets stranger.
My friend and colleague Luke Royes said he remembered the same thing happening about a year ago, as he had been working at the time and did the same double-take at the Most Popular lists.
Luke suggested it was an anniversary thing (Morgan died on December 7, 2011). But the majority of the comments we saw on Facebook didn’t seem to reflect this — for instance, if people had written something like “Remembering this great guy today!”
But for most people (again, based on our Facebook searches), it appeared to be new news to them.
Then Luke wondered if it was an in-joke among MASH fans? We both don’t fall into this category so it was possible this had just gone over our heads. But again, all the messages seemed sincere. (Also, the MASH fans in the office and a Google search couldn’t make such a connection either.)
Looking back at our analytics, the article did indeed resurface in December 2015. It also attracted big numbers then and about 80 per cent of page views came from Facebook.
At this, another colleague suggested maybe it was a date thing where Facebook was resurfacing stuff that happened ‘on this day’.
I can see how that tiny butterfly flapping its wings might trigger a sprinkle of rain over a village. But a tornado across the internet?
For me, it just doesn’t explain the very large number of people for whom Morgan’s death was just another sad moment of 2016. Bowie, Harambe, Colonel Potter.
And look, if I’ve fallen victim to some new Rickrolling thing — then please, let me know. I will gladly put my hand up and say, you got me.
But if anyone else has any ideas as to why so many people appeared to not notice the date on this story before they shared it, please share your knowledge with the rest of us.
Cause honestly, I’m baffled.
(Thanks Luke Royes for your help with this!)
Note: I updated the sentence that earlier said the 2015 resurfacing had not happened to the same extent as 2016. Turns out, it did!
