In an attempt to rationalize the fact that
Donald Trump has been elected as the next president of the United States, a
growing movement is lashing out against
“fake news sites,” even labeling them responsible for the election results.
Earlier this week, a document “False, Misleading, Clickbait-y,
and/or Satirical ‘News’ Sources” was uploaded to Facebook by a
user named Melissa Zimdars. The document made the rounds on social media,
adding fuel to the fake news fire. Despite the fact that Zimdars’ list
ironically lacks proper citation, blatantly targets right-wing outlets, and
includes perfectly legitimate sites for no apparent reason, the Los Angeles Times
published the false, misleading, clickbait-y document, lending it an air of
legitimacy.
The irony in the assistant professor’s
project is that it mirrors everything she is warning others about. Although it
is prefaced with a disclaimer, the document is being shared by “legitimate”
news outlets as a legitimate report. Some of it is true and some of it is
cited, but overall, it’s a poor resource to rely on for guidance on reputable
news outlets. It almost makes one wonder if this young teacher is conducting
her own social experiment to see how seriously people will take a Google
document uploaded to Facebook.
Fake news sites are certainly problematic
in a world where the majority of people get their news
from social networks; a good portion of those people don’t even read articles before
sharing them. Facebook and Google have
responded to the hysteria by announcing their decision to ban what they deem to
be fake news sites from their advertising platforms. This is a cause for concern
for many reasons.
As Edward Snowden pointed out, “[t]o
have one company that has enough power to reshape the way we think, I don’t
think I need to describe how dangerous that is.” Snowden addressed the fake
news issue in detail via Beambot at Fusion’s Real Future Fair on
Tuesday.
“I don’t think many people need to have
this explained to them, that when you type something into the Google search
box, it’s Google that decides what you get back. When you go to your Facebook
page, it’s Facebook that decides what news it is that you see on your page.
When you go to a platform like Twitter, or any of these, really, the voices
that are heard are the ones that are selected and permitted by the
corporation.”
He identifies the source of the problem as
a lack of competition. “There seems to be no alternative to the larger
services. Because of this network effect, because [of] the first mover
advantage. When you get a Google or a Facebook or Twitter in place, they never
seem to leave.”
His solution? Don’t rely on Facebook for
your news. By banning websites from their platform, they are essentially
telling users they aren’t intelligent enough to decide for themselves what is
and is not news. As Snowden put it, “they’re creating more silence than they
are creating more speech.”
