Breaking Fake News
By Alan Nero
In my last article, A News World Order, I discussed the impossible standards imposed on journalists by the objectivity paradox, the danger of disguised bias, and the issues that result. Social media serves as a staggering platform for these issues to arise. Here are 5 tweets/articles that exemplify how the problem is perpetuated.
#5 Citizens misusing the term “Fake News”
This tweet focuses on an NPR article regarding Trump’s proposal to restrict work waivers for able-bodied recipients of food stamps.
The tweeter quotes the article out of context. The article states over 750,000 people could lose their access to food stamps and includes statements from both proponents and opponents of the proposal. As well as expert opinions and input from current SNAP recipients.
While the article may include viewpoints this tweeter doesn’t agree with, it doesn’t include any false information. However, in the current hostile climate, “Fake News” is synonymous with “I disagree”. While false reports are certainly produced, misuse of the term “Fake News” causes more harm than good, by falsely accusing proper journalists of dishonesty.
#4 Politicians using “Fake News” rhetoric without focus or evidence
Nearly three years into Trump’s presidency, everyone is accustomed to his battle cry “Fake News”, and that’s a problem. Trump first coined the phrase when media covered him critically during his campaign. Since then, he’s used this term to label any organization he disagrees with as untrustworthy.
While Trump once referred to specific reports, he’s developed a trend of generalizing. By leaving his accusations open interpretation by his supporters, this allows them to make the specific accusations for him without making Trump responsible for a statement of substance.
In examining this tweet for structure of an argument, there’s no specific target. There’s no specific evidence provided because there’s no target, and therefore no legitimate claim to back up. Nothing statements like this encourage people to use it as a Mad-libs style framework to form prejudices against journalists.
#3 Politicians using biased news for their agendas
The Daily Caller is one among many overtly conservative media outlets that dissected a March 29th MSNBC interview with former Homeland Security Secretary, Jeh Johnson. During the interview, Johnson stated the influx of daily apprehensions at the border, around 4,000, is a crisis because it badly stalls processing detainees.
The full interview established the issue is separating immigrant children from their parents, which caused increased apprehension rates. By obscuring the issue, they tailored words of an opponent to child separation to instill a false sense of fear. By sharing false information to manipulate the public with fear mongering, outlets and politicians destabilize the reputation of the press ever further.
#2 Needless Reports made by Media
Journalists trapped themselves in a rabbit hole with continued coverage of Trump’s speech, proven lies, actions, and misdeeds. All of which continue at astonishing rates every day. By covering every instance, they cover up significant stories with insignificant reports and damage their own reputations.
The tweet above is on a collection of Jeanne Moos pieces focused on the bizarre behavior of Trump. Whether you agree with her views or not is irrelevant. The damage done is in Moos’ needless focus on minutia when Trump is already under a microscope for corruption, fraud, and a host of other allegations. By producing stories such as these, journalists discredit themselves, their organizations, and journalists in general by appearing petty and negatively biased.
#1 News organizations weaponizing the objectivity paradox
When journalists weaponize objectivity they not only damage the reputations of others by assessing their work through an impossible standard, they perpetuate the misunderstanding. The above is a sponsored tweet from NewsBusters, featuring an article criticizing the New York Times for not being objective.
The Times itself still cleaves to the objectivity paradox, which makes it possible for others to do the same. If the world of journalism could only wrest itself from the impossible standard of objectivity, we could adjust the metrics to honesty, accuracy, and equity. At which point, we could confidently separate the truth from lies and end the “Fake News” scare.
