Part 5: Ethics and Reporting Practices for COVID-19
Precise narratives; bad actors; mimetic forms
In this blog post, I cover the importance of collaborating with scientific researchers and public health experts to develop narratives for news stories, and how the “bad actors” who are sowing mis- and disinformation also come in the form of institutions that mimic traditional news media. Read my previous round-ups here, here, here, and here.
“I did not say that”
Last week, Nathan Grubaugh, an assistant professor at the Yale School of Public Health, tweeted about being misattributed on a significant story that claimed “infections spreading from New York account for 60 to 65 percent of the cases across the country.” This concept was then amplified in a headline that has since been changed, and seemed to blame New Yorkers for traveling and spreading the virus.
“I DID NOT SAY THAT” he wrote in a tweet, and bemoaned the many spin-off stories that had been published in other outlets that had picked up this reporting. Journalists should ask scientific researchers and public health experts, who are sources, to contribute to the narrative instead of just offering quotes. Ask them to read stories in a sort of peer-review process before publication to ensure accuracy of the concepts communicated. A well-meaning journalist with little science background may misunderstand a concept, and use a quote to confirm their understanding.
In a deeply polarized landscape, attributing virus spread to the cosmopolitan capital of the so-called “liberal elite” as portrayed in some conservative outlets may deepen societal rifts further. What Grubaugh did say was that the 60–65% of strains circulating in the US are from a “clade” that includes those from New York and Europe. If anything, this line of reasoning—echoed by other scientists who are also exploring the genomic sequences of various strains—indicates that many of the New York cases came from Europe, not from China. Furthermore, Grubaugh’s work clearly states that this is a hypothesis; an educated guess from an expert who will continue to research this idea further in the weeks to come. Genomic sequencing of viruses does not exist as a methodology to figure out “where the virus came from” so that we can attribute blame to certain peoples, cities, and states. Rather, this form of research exists to understand how the virus may be mutating, in order to mitigate its impact.
Giving researchers and scientists more agency to contribute to the narrative with precision and clarity is vital.
Our starting point in some ways has to be about the many structures that are failing us, and how we can collectively fix them without resorting to emotional or physical violence, xenophobia, hate, and conspiracy theories. We can also acknowledge the many structures that are functioning, and platform individuals who are contributing to these efforts in a positive, beneficial way. Giving researchers and scientists more agency to contribute to the narrative with precision and clarity is vital.
The problem with “bad actors”
Bad actors assemble various facts to manipulate already existing information, narrative voids, and data voids. Last week, we saw three classic forms of misinformation presented in the modalities of legitimate documentary, cable channel, and newspaper: A viral video called “Plandemic” circulated rapidly on social media before being removed by major platforms including Facebook. Joe Pinsker wrote for The Atlantic about how to respond to someone you know who shares this video. Brian Stelter and Oliver Darcy at CNN connected this media phenomena to a small, obscure cable network called One America News (OAN) that has been disseminating a parallel theory about Dr. Fauci, Bill Gates, and other influential “elites” despite contestations from two journalists on their own staff. Davey Alba at The New York Times noted that the protagonist of “Plandemic” was previously featured in the Epoch Times, a newspaper funded and created by members of the Falun Gong, a minority religious community in China that continues to publish stories connecting COVID-19 to the Chinese Communist Party. Brandy Zadrozny and Ben Collins at NBC News have written extensively about the rise of Epoch Times both in the past, and in this pandemic moment. These three narratives are tied together through amplification in a right wing media ecosystem that has changed since 2016, but retains the same basic principles. In 2016, this ecosystem was centered around Breitbart — now players like Epoch Times and OAN are becoming central megaphones of the Trump Administration’s messaging.
While in the past we’ve used the individuated term “bad actors” to attribute the origins of misinformation, the sources of this particular misinformation are institutions and outlets that mimic the form and processes of traditional media, but instead disseminate varieties of propaganda. These purveyors of propaganda have become ossified and legitimized by their structures: in 2018, the Epoch Times celebrated the opening of its Washington bureau at the National Press Club. The Epoch Times recently distributed unsolicited special edition print copies of their paper to Canadian homes, despite objections from citizens. Stelter at CNN describes how OAN has garnered an active audience, in part because of promotion from the President on Twitter. Marshall Allen at ProPublica describes his surprise at how easily people he knew seemed to believe elements of the brusquely-constructed documentary. Collins at NBC documents the real-world consequences of this misinformation, as doctors express exasperation at the level of misinformation circulating. One doctor described misinformation as the “second most painful thing I’ve had to deal with, other than separation of families from their loved one.”
In a country where the free press and free speech are constitutionally protected, how are the social platforms determining which content to take down?
In a country where the free press and free speech are constitutionally protected, how are the social platforms determining which content to take down? Dubious documentaries and home-grown media have always existed, but never with the speed of spread that social platforms currently enable, and never with a president who actively promotes these sources.
A Washington Post article last month described that American-produced misinformation far outweighs misinformation produced by Russia or China, or any other foreign power: “Sadly, foreign actors aren’t the biggest danger. We Americans are…Foreign actors are often merely curating messages that we Americans created. Instead of making stories up from whole cloth, foreign adversaries take the misinformation we give them and launder it into disinformation.”
Broader narratives from these quasi-institutional actors are supplemented with memes, hashtags, and peer-to-peer messages on social media platforms, including closed messaging apps. The Technology and Social Change Project at the Shorenstein Center at Harvard publishes a weekly newsletter, Meme War Weekly, that documents political messaging, meme culture, and viral misinformation ‘from the wilds of the Internet,’ and picks up on the nuance of this political messaging. Read more about tactics of media manipulation here.
Additional Readings:
- Epoch Times, Punished by Facebook, Gets a New Megaphone on YouTube, The New York Times.
- Trump, QAnon and an impending judgment day: Behind the Facebook-fueled rise of The Epoch Times, NBC News.
- How US conspiracy theorists are targeting local government in the UK, New Statesman
- Meet OAN, the little-watched right-wing news channel that Trump keeps promoting, CNN
- One America News Network, Trump’s New Favorite, Is a Bore, The Daily Beast
Smitha Khorana is the Newsroom Outreach Lead at Data & Society. She’s written for The Guardian, The Intercept, Columbia Journalism Review, and co-edited a book on the Snowden leaks and the surveillance state.
Suggestions, comments, or noticed a resource we missed? E-mail smitha@datasociety.net.
